14:47:19 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #pointerevents
14:47:23 <RRSAgent> logging to https://www.w3.org/2025/05/07-pointerevents-irc
14:55:17 <Patrick_H_Lauke> Meeting: PEWG
14:55:22 <Patrick_H_Lauke> Chair: Patrick H. Lauke
14:55:26 <Patrick_H_Lauke> Scribe: Patrick H. Lauke
14:55:33 <Patrick_H_Lauke> ScribeNick: Patrick_H_Lauke
14:56:00 <Patrick_H_Lauke> Agenda: https://www.w3.org/events/meetings/66591f6b-6694-4f90-b23d-bf8f1b9dda8a/20250507T110000/
14:56:07 <Patrick_H_Lauke> present+
15:00:53 <flackr> flackr has joined #pointerevents
15:01:05 <smaug> present+
15:02:04 <mustaq> present+
15:02:23 <flackr> present+
15:02:28 <Patrick_H_Lauke> TOPIC: PE3 candidate recommendation https://www.w3.org/TR/pointerevents3/
15:04:41 <Patrick_H_Lauke> Patrick: for those who haven't seen already, PE3 is now in CR. spoke to Philippe and asked about WPTs and whether we need everything passing in 2 implementations, or if it's on a per test basis.
15:04:57 <Patrick_H_Lauke> Patrick: Need 2 implementations per test
15:05:24 <Patrick_H_Lauke> Patrick: to then exit CR we need 2 implementations for each test. implementation report just pointing to WPT results
15:05:34 <Patrick_H_Lauke> PLH: spec is now back on automatic publishing as well
15:06:07 <Patrick_H_Lauke> Olli: luckily PE is part of interop 2025, so some of the tests/implementations will get fixed now
15:06:19 <Patrick_H_Lauke> TOPIC: PointerEvents as living standard https://github.com/w3c/pointerevents/issues/471#issuecomment-2847190233
15:11:43 <Patrick_H_Lauke> [discussion on the challenges of living standard, and the editing overhead / how it makes specs unreadable, and other options]
15:12:30 <Patrick_H_Lauke> Patrick: so any preference? I'm happy with NOT having too much editing overhead, happy to keep the regular model we've been doing
15:12:54 <Patrick_H_Lauke> Rob: one thing I would suggest is clearly marking things that are at risk
15:13:42 <Patrick_H_Lauke> PLH: that is also supported in bikeshed (?). but suggest we work on the tip, and then once we have 2 implementations for a set of new features, we cut that to a Level 4
15:13:58 <Patrick_H_Lauke> Rob: one issue we also have is making changes to existing/previous issues
15:14:14 <Patrick_H_Lauke> PLH: which is why, as you may have seen, we deprecated older versions
15:14:36 <Patrick_H_Lauke> Mustaq: is there a way to version WPTs? to make clear when a test is for 2, or 3, ...
15:15:08 <Patrick_H_Lauke> PLH: my recommendation is to always have WPT refer to the latest tip. not split by levels
15:15:42 <Patrick_H_Lauke> PLH: if we need to, we can make a separate list of which WPTs are a sublist for a particular version
15:15:56 <Patrick_H_Lauke> Olli: just checked MDN, it points to editors' draft
15:16:08 <Patrick_H_Lauke> PLH: and editor draft is always the tip
15:16:33 <Patrick_H_Lauke> PLH: and TR/pointerevents goes to the tip
15:16:46 <Patrick_H_Lauke> PLH: versioned URLs become historical artifacts more than anything else
15:18:19 <Patrick_H_Lauke> Patrick: is there a cutoff point now that we're in CR when we need all WPTs green?
15:18:34 <Patrick_H_Lauke> PLH: in next 20 years ... but seriously, not maximum
15:19:11 <Patrick_H_Lauke> Patrick: suggest we push to get these supported soon though, so we don't drag this on forever in CR
15:19:38 <Patrick_H_Lauke> PLH: we may also need to see which WPTs we care for. example of touch-action with more than one value, seems Gecko doesn't support it, only blink
15:19:47 <Patrick_H_Lauke> Olli: think there's also issues in WPT runners themselves
15:20:08 <Patrick_H_Lauke> PLH: and that's ok. if we can come up with an explanation of why a test is red, that's ok
15:20:57 <Patrick_H_Lauke> PLH: but yes, decide which WPTs do we care about, and then check if they fail because WPT is limited, or if there's a real lack of implementation, and if the latter, do we push for it
15:21:29 <Patrick_H_Lauke> PLH: also, do we have full test coverage?
15:21:57 <Patrick_H_Lauke> Olli: think so. Masayuki has found a lot of edge cases and filed new tests/implemented things in Gecko
15:22:09 <Patrick_H_Lauke> Rob: WPT tests also have issues with coalesced etc. tests
15:22:17 <Patrick_H_Lauke> PLH: so we may need to do manual test...
15:22:53 <Patrick_H_Lauke> PLH: we need to compile a list of how tests *can* be run, do they need manual tests, are there some things that realistically *can't* even test
15:23:10 <Patrick_H_Lauke> PLH: example of what may not be testable is how a pointerId gets assigned
15:23:19 <Patrick_H_Lauke> Rob: there are also things that you need particular hardware for
15:23:27 <Patrick_H_Lauke> Rob: such as detailed properties for pens
15:24:18 <Patrick_H_Lauke> PLH: maybe then taking the list of changes, then check that each change (PE2 > PE3) has test, and note if there are gaps for testing (test needs to run manually, can't be tested, etc)
15:25:08 <Patrick_H_Lauke> PLH: if we conclude that for some features we won't have sufficient implementation, we can then still remove them from level 3 and defer them to level 4
15:25:37 <Patrick_H_Lauke> PLH: want me to make a first pass at this?
15:25:47 <Patrick_H_Lauke> Patrick: if you have time/inclination, i'd very much appreciate it, thank you
15:25:57 <Patrick_H_Lauke> PLH: might do separate markdown file and link from issue
15:26:28 <Patrick_H_Lauke> ACTION: PLH to make first run at compiling list of new features, related WPTs, and any gaps in tests/implementations
15:26:49 <Patrick_H_Lauke> TOPIC: Meta-issue: update WPT to cover Pointer Events Level 3 https://github.com/w3c/pointerevents/issues/445 / https://github.com/w3c/pointerevents/issues?q=label%3Aneeds-wpt+
15:28:00 <Patrick_H_Lauke> Patrick: unless I forgot to take labels off, it looks like we have 3 that still need wpt. how are they doing?
15:29:26 <Patrick_H_Lauke> Adam: I worked on https://github.com/w3c/pointerevents/issues/513 which now seems to have been merged
15:29:40 <Patrick_H_Lauke> Patrick: thank you, removing needs-wpt label
15:30:05 <Patrick_H_Lauke> Patrick: so we have https://github.com/w3c/pointerevents/issues/534 left...
15:30:28 <Patrick_H_Lauke> Mustaq: i meant to do a test, will look at it
15:30:36 <Patrick_H_Lauke> ACTION: Mustaq to look at test for #534
15:31:16 <Patrick_H_Lauke> Patrick: and the last one https://github.com/w3c/pointerevents/issues/509
15:31:31 <Patrick_H_Lauke> Olli: Masayuki was away last few days, will ask him if he can write a test
15:31:44 <Patrick_H_Lauke> ACTION: Olli to ask Masayuki about test for #509
15:34:55 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2025/05/07-pointerevents-minutes.html plh
15:37:09 <Patrick_H_Lauke> TOPIC: https://github.com/w3c/pointerevents/issues/542
15:37:56 <Patrick_H_Lauke> Mustaq: idea we had - if you can tie it to click event, identify if it's a stable click or a "drifting" click. from a web platform perspective
15:38:58 <Patrick_H_Lauke> Patrick: that reminds me from old touch events tests i used to do, distinction between a "dirty" tap and a "clean"tap, and only the latter would also fire click
15:39:35 <Patrick_H_Lauke> Mustaq: if you know of any other spec/issue that could be helped by this idea of drifting/dirty click, add to the issue
15:40:18 <Patrick_H_Lauke> Mustaq: doing "slop detection" from basic principles, or if this could be helped via UA
15:40:42 <Patrick_H_Lauke> Olli: need to be careful that we don't implement some magical property that then works differently based on different heuristics
16:03:18 <Patrick_H_Lauke> TOPIC: TPAC 2025
16:04:51 <Patrick_H_Lauke> Patrick: still early days, but start planning/thinking if you'll be in person at TPAC (november in Kobe, Japan). we have until 20 June to book slot for group session/joint sessions. For latter, was thinking perhaps trying to sit down with either i18n or csswg for the logical touch-action values. Anyway, not putting people on spot right now, but start considering
16:05:05 <Patrick_H_Lauke> Olli: I will likely be there
16:05:47 <Patrick_H_Lauke> Patrick: if there's no other topics, we'll keep it short-ish. Thank you all, we meet again in 2 weeks' time
16:05:53 <Patrick_H_Lauke> RRSAgent, set logs world-visible
16:06:01 <Patrick_H_Lauke> rrsagent, generate minutes
16:06:02 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2025/05/07-pointerevents-minutes.html Patrick_H_Lauke
16:06:17 <Patrick_H_Lauke> rrsagent, bye
16:06:17 <RRSAgent> I see 3 open action items saved in https://www.w3.org/2025/05/07-pointerevents-actions.rdf :
16:06:17 <RRSAgent> ACTION: PLH to make first run at compiling list of new features, related WPTs, and any gaps in tests/implementations [1]
16:06:17 <RRSAgent>   recorded in https://www.w3.org/2025/05/07-pointerevents-irc#T15-26-28
16:06:17 <RRSAgent> ACTION: Mustaq to look at test for #534 [2]
16:06:17 <RRSAgent>   recorded in https://www.w3.org/2025/05/07-pointerevents-irc#T15-30-36
16:06:17 <RRSAgent> ACTION: Olli to ask Masayuki about test for #509 [3]
16:06:17 <RRSAgent>   recorded in https://www.w3.org/2025/05/07-pointerevents-irc#T15-31-44