14:56:39 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #pointerevents
14:56:43 <RRSAgent> logging to https://www.w3.org/2024/10/23-pointerevents-irc
14:56:46 <Patrick_H_Lauke> Meeting: PEWG
14:56:57 <Patrick_H_Lauke> Chair: Patrick H. Lauke
14:56:59 <Patrick_H_Lauke> Agenda: https://www.w3.org/events/meetings/66591f6b-6694-4f90-b23d-bf8f1b9dda8a/20241023T110000/
14:57:03 <Patrick_H_Lauke> Scribe: Patrick H. Lauke
14:57:08 <Patrick_H_Lauke> ScribeNick: Patrick_H_Lauke
14:57:15 <Patrick_H_Lauke> present+
15:01:12 <Patrick_H_Lauke> present+ flackr
15:01:20 <Patrick_H_Lauke> present+ mustaq
15:01:36 <Patrick_H_Lauke> present+ smaug
15:02:33 <Patrick_H_Lauke> TOPIC: Limit the precision of floating point event fields https://github.com/w3c/pointerevents/issues/517
15:03:08 <Patrick_H_Lauke> Olli: I added a comment
15:03:59 <Patrick_H_Lauke> Rob: I was on the hook to write something up. I have strong feelings that precision should be at least down to device pixel level, and not to create excessive banding
15:05:58 <Patrick_H_Lauke> Rob: to bring back to root concern, even choosing higher precision of the two options, it's not going to be precise enough to reveal things like battery fluctuations
15:06:36 <Patrick_H_Lauke> ACTION: Rob to draft an initial basic PR to get some of these thoughts down for us to iterate over
15:06:49 <Patrick_H_Lauke> TOPIC: Ensure predicted events only use input from the current partition https://github.com/w3c/pointerevents/issues/518
15:07:32 <Patrick_H_Lauke> Patrick: I was the one that I'd do an initial basic PR for discussion, but had no time since last meeting. Promise that for the next meeting I'll have something to discuss
15:08:18 <Patrick_H_Lauke> ACTION: Patrick to draft a PR to address this
15:08:32 <Patrick_H_Lauke> TOPIC: [touch actions] handwriting manipulation type to distinguish panning https://github.com/w3c/pointerevents/issues/516
15:10:30 <Patrick_H_Lauke> Patrick: I think one of the concerns we've had in the discussion of the issue since the meeting was what should happen on devices that don't support handwriting, and developers not being aware that effectively this will result in touch-action: none unintentionally
15:11:08 <Patrick_H_Lauke> Rob: trying to think how we tackled this with things like zoom ... just to make sure that users can also still pan
15:11:45 <Patrick_H_Lauke> Rob: if an authors specifies pinch-zoom, does that mean they can't pan? that's the same footgun
15:12:02 <Patrick_H_Lauke> Mustaq: this is the same potential problem
15:12:34 <mustaq> Pinch-zoom in a separate bit in Chromium: https://source.chromium.org/chromium/chromium/src/+/main:cc/input/touch_action.h;drc=635df9846eb3eb7ddf2b4f36b9e32c4ea650b368;l=32
15:13:54 <mustaq> Here is the spec: https://compat.spec.whatwg.org/#touch-action
15:17:22 <Patrick_H_Lauke> Patrick: I admit that I am still not quite understanding the use case of touch-action: handwriting, as from the presentation at BlinkOn (?) it seems that this uses heuristics by default - if i start handwriting near an input/writeable field, it assumes i'm handwriting. so this touch-action: handwriting seems the opposite of what you'd want...telling the browser NOT to do handwriting
15:17:30 <Patrick_H_Lauke> Rob: this is consistent though with other touch actions
15:18:11 <Patrick_H_Lauke> Patrick: but it means that up to now, if a dev had set any specific touch-action, and they omitted handwriting (as it didn't exist), the browser should IGNORE handwriting, but it clearly isn't at the moment
15:18:26 <Patrick_H_Lauke> Rob: except if we say that manipulation includes handwriting
15:19:54 <Patrick_H_Lauke> ACTION: further discussion on the issue, as some aspects (use case in particular) aren't quite clear to all
15:20:13 <Patrick_H_Lauke> TOPIC: Meta-issue: update WPT to cover Pointer Events Level 3 #445 https://github.com/w3c/pointerevents/issues/445
15:20:44 <Patrick_H_Lauke> Patrick: think we were close, only had this one for now https://github.com/w3c/pointerevents/pull/300
15:21:42 <Patrick_H_Lauke> Rob: I put together a test page for this
15:23:24 <Patrick_H_Lauke> Rob: as at first I thought Chrome was allowing bidirectional (?) capture, but testing this with the new test page i couldn't repro. so might be WPT framework has some bug/issue that gives wrong result
15:23:51 <Patrick_H_Lauke> Olli: ... we'll still need the same origin test though
15:24:18 <Patrick_H_Lauke> [discussion on how out-of-process might affect test/check]
15:24:28 <flackr> flackr has joined #pointerevents
15:24:29 <flackr> https://flackr.github.io/web-demos/pointer-events/capture-frame/index.html
15:24:38 <Patrick_H_Lauke> present+ flackr
15:26:59 <Patrick_H_Lauke> Rob: both of the captures in the above demo fail
15:27:14 <Patrick_H_Lauke> Mustaq: you're seeing same behaviour, regardless of which direction you go
15:27:38 <Patrick_H_Lauke> Rob: i also think the silent failure may not be right. we loudly fail in other cases, why be silent on this one
15:28:13 <Patrick_H_Lauke> Rob: would anybody be opposed to allowing same origin capture? or should we delay until we see people needing it?
15:28:38 <Patrick_H_Lauke> Rob: if goal is to specify what's implemented, we can just test the current thing and figure out why the WPT behaves differently from this test page...
15:29:14 <Patrick_H_Lauke> Olli: thinking of other cases other than same origin...
15:29:41 <Patrick_H_Lauke> Rob: don't feel strongly we need to enable this - currently not allowed, and not heard any feedback from devs complaining about this, to my knowledge
15:31:13 <Patrick_H_Lauke> Patrick: suggest perhaps opening a new future speculative issue "should this be relaxed?", and passing this to a few other folks (including those from Apple) and see what the feedback there is, but for right now for v3 just investigate WPT oddity
15:31:32 <Patrick_H_Lauke> ACTION: Rob et al, investigate WPT odd behaviour for this test
15:32:05 <Patrick_H_Lauke> ACTION: Open speculative new issue about potential relaxing of the requirement for same origin
15:33:06 <Patrick_H_Lauke> Patrick: Rob is it worth also filing a new issue/doing a PR about not silently failing, but loudly failing?
15:33:59 <Patrick_H_Lauke> Olli: so about throwing error?
15:34:12 <Patrick_H_Lauke> Rob: yeah we throw in other similar scenarios, but in this case we silently fail
15:34:52 <Patrick_H_Lauke> Rob: in my mind, the developer contract is much clearer if you request a capture and it throws if it wasn't possible/allowed
15:35:00 <Patrick_H_Lauke> Mustaq: this would be fine with me
15:36:20 <Patrick_H_Lauke> Olli: not sure we can just push it for v3
15:36:22 <Patrick_H_Lauke> Rob: we're masking developer bugs
15:37:07 <Patrick_H_Lauke> Patrick: we can leave it for now in v3, and earmark it for a consistency update in v4/future
15:37:23 <Patrick_H_Lauke> ACTION: File an issue about future update to make failed capture throw
15:37:45 <Patrick_H_Lauke> TOPIC: Triage unlabelled issues https://github.com/w3c/pointerevents/issues?q=is%3Aissue+is%3Aopen+-label%3Afuture+-label%3Av3++-label%3Av3-blocking
15:39:22 <Patrick_H_Lauke> Mustaq: suggest we devote time next meeting to just go through them right there in the call
15:40:23 <Patrick_H_Lauke> Thank you all
15:40:31 <Patrick_H_Lauke> rrsagent, make logs world-visible
15:40:37 <Patrick_H_Lauke> rrsagent, generate minutes
15:40:38 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2024/10/23-pointerevents-minutes.html Patrick_H_Lauke
17:06:52 <Patrick_H_Lauke> rrsagent, bye
17:06:52 <RRSAgent> I see 6 open action items saved in https://www.w3.org/2024/10/23-pointerevents-actions.rdf :
17:06:52 <RRSAgent> ACTION: Rob to draft an initial basic PR to get some of these thoughts down for us to iterate over [1]
17:06:52 <RRSAgent>   recorded in https://www.w3.org/2024/10/23-pointerevents-irc#T15-06-36
17:06:52 <RRSAgent> ACTION: Patrick to draft a PR to address this [2]
17:06:52 <RRSAgent>   recorded in https://www.w3.org/2024/10/23-pointerevents-irc#T15-08-18
17:06:52 <RRSAgent> ACTION: further discussion on the issue, as some aspects (use case in particular) aren't quite clear to all [3]
17:06:52 <RRSAgent>   recorded in https://www.w3.org/2024/10/23-pointerevents-irc#T15-19-54
17:06:52 <RRSAgent> ACTION: Rob et al, investigate WPT odd behaviour for this test [4]
17:06:52 <RRSAgent>   recorded in https://www.w3.org/2024/10/23-pointerevents-irc#T15-31-32
17:06:52 <RRSAgent> ACTION: Open speculative new issue about potential relaxing of the requirement for same origin [5]
17:06:52 <RRSAgent>   recorded in https://www.w3.org/2024/10/23-pointerevents-irc#T15-32-05
17:06:52 <RRSAgent> ACTION: File an issue about future update to make failed capture throw [6]
17:06:52 <RRSAgent>   recorded in https://www.w3.org/2024/10/23-pointerevents-irc#T15-37-23