Meeting minutes
Limit the precision of floating point event fields w3c/pointerevents#517
Patrick: rob wanted to work on this, but it IS slightly non-trivial. see there's activity just today on it w3c/
Patrick: looking at the web animations wording, yes i think using wording of that nature, mentioning potential privacy issues, and then reiterating that again in the privacy section, might be the way to go
Patrick: we don't want to unnecessarily limit the precision IF a web application actually wants to take full advantage of precise sensors. looking at angles, even capping to 1 degree seems excessive
Patrick: don't think Rob has had a chance, so I might take it off his hands and make a first stab at it. i envisage a separate section after all the values in the IDL (rather than mentioning it for each value). for position related things, saying it should at least resolve to hardware pixel. for others, might be a bit trickier. and explain the core concern here about fluctuations in sensors that are consistent and can be us[CUT]
ingerprint
ACTION: Patrick to draft PR for #517
Patrick: On that topic, it seems we're still waiting for wide review from security w3c/
Patrick: Philippe, what's the process on this? can we leave it after various attempts to get it?
PLH: yes, you can time out
PLH: how long ago did you ask?
Patrick: May
PLH: then you can time out without chasing them up. if it comes to it later, we may ask them again, but for now, we can time it out
[touch actions] handwriting manipulation type to distinguish panning w3c/pointerevents#516
Patrick: Olga had some actions from the last meeting, no action from us at the moment
Olli: looks like there's a PR for their explainer, but it's still open
Meta-issue: update WPT to cover Pointer Events Level 3 #445 w3c/pointerevents#445
Patrick: I think we're in a good place for this one https://
Mustaq: Rob has been working on #300 - have some background about it: test failed due to some fishy behaviour on Chromium side, should be an easy fix though
Patrick: then for
Patrick: #509 i looked earlier and added the "needs-wpt" label
Patrick: so might be good to look at this...
ACTION: Olli to review #509 for potential test
Triage unlabelled issues https://github.com/w3c/pointerevents/issues?q=is%3Aissue+is%3Aopen+-label%3Afuture+-label%3Av3++-label%3Av3-blocking
Patrick: everything now is tagged with either "v3"/"v3-blocking" or "future" (with exception of the one issue #506 that is more administrative)
Patrick: any issues we want to look at specifically?
Olli: nothing from me
Patrick: from the list of blocking issues https://
Patrick: w3c/
Patrick: should just be a change to prose, nothing substantive
Mustaq: I can send a pull request next week
ACTION: Mustaq to submit PR for #504
Patrick: w3c/
Olli: that's the one I promised a PR for but didn't have time due to vacation
Patrick: no problem
ACTION: Olli to look at #513
Patrick: let's look at v3 in general https://
Patrick: w3c/
Patrick: sorry...revisiting the same...we discussed this earlier
Olli: there's this one that Mustaq reopened w3c/
[discussion on synthetic pointermove vs mousemove - should pointermove events be faked?]
Mustaq: should pointer events not send fake/synthetic events, even though in past authors may have relied on synthetic mouse events?
Olli: yes, that would be my preference, as it keeps pointer events nice and clear - you only get it when it actually moves
Olli: this is failing only in chromium
Olli: this hints that webkit doesn't send any synthetic events, ever
Mustaq: I'd conclude the same
Olli: so do we want more consistency betwen mouse and pointer events, or keep PE clearer and better defined
Mustaq: need to check how to handle hover effect
Mustaq: should close issue #459 as there's too many concerns/discussions, and refocus on more specific issues
successpr tp/ACTION: Mustaq to file new issue as follow-up/successor to #549/successpr tp
ACTION: Mustaq to file new issue as follow-up/successor to #549
Mustaq: would we want this v3-blocking?
Patrick: depends how easy/hard it is. if it's only a small wording tweak and a test, might be good to get it in for v3
Mustaq: or should we continue on the same issue?
Olli: probably good to have one specifically about synthetic events in general
Patrick: right, I think that covers all v3/v3-blocking things we need to discuss at this point. We can break early. Thank you as ever, we'll reconvene in 2 weeks' time