W3C

– DRAFT –
PEWG

05 November 2025

Attendees

Present
flackr, gastonr, mustaq, Patrick_H_Lauke, smaug
Regrets
-
Chair
Patrick H. Lauke
Scribe
Patrick_H_Lauke, Patrick H. Lauke

Meeting minutes

Update on recharter and new PE3 snapshot

Patrick: from last time, i removed the unidirectional touch-action from PE3 w3c/pointerevents#558

Patrick: based on that philippe requested a new dated snapshot w3c/transitions#750 (comment)

Patrick: from our last meeting, I updated our charter w3c/charter-drafts#715

Patrick: adding mention of gestures, and clarifying that we're not going to try to define the black box magic of how UA decides what is / isn't a gesture

Patrick: but we just want to have an API for content to then consume gestures once recognised

Patrick: based on that, Philippe requested the rechartering w3c/strategy#515 and asked for a current charter extension until that goes through

Robert: does charter need to say anything more about mouse?

Patrick: didn't need to do anything more I think, as we have https://github.com/w3c/charter-drafts/pull/715/files#diff-23fac1ecea013b66aaa6c4f2b03eb8ea1ea26c305759015375605e5bd29ec8f1R159

Web Platform Tests https://wpt.live/pointerevents/ / https://wpt.fyi/results/pointerevents?label=experimental&label=master&aligned

Patrick: I believe you did something on this since last time, Mustaq

Mustaq: yes, I've looked at tweaking how failures are surfaced (?)

<mustaq> w3c/pointerevents#559

Mustaq: that first list isn't completely precise, but goes in the right direction

Rob: wonder if we can filter by tests that relate to PE level *3* to weed out some things from 4

Mustaq: don't think tests are tagged in a granular-enough way / make a distinction between versions of PE

Rob: don't need to be super granular, but removing things that are explicitly in 4 would be good to exclude those

Mustaq: good idea to label. wonder if we can reuse existing labels like "optional" or "tentative"

Patrick: "tentative" sounds appropriate to me as an outsider...

Rob: "tentative" is usually reserved for things where there's not even a draft, so not quite the right one

Patrick: is it a problem creating a new label, do we HAVE to reuse an existing label?

Mustaq: no, not a problem

Rob: want to make sure we also remove things that aren't REALLY pointer events issues per se, but more pointerlock or similar

Mustaq: CSS specs go through stages ... wonder how they handle it

Rob: they'd have same problem, as tests aren't split by levels

Rob: having meta tags, or lists of tags...

Gaston: tests can be labelled for interop ... maybe the mechanism that's used for THAT can be used for our purpose

Mustaq: need to be careful with renaming filenames, as it will break lots of external references

Mustaq: so any method we choose should not touch them

Patrick: should we do an action for this? or we can also discuss this in person next week at TPAC...

Rob: there will be other spec people there too, so that might be good

ACTION: discuss labelling/thinslicing/filtering for different levels of PE for the WPT tests at TPAC

Any particular old or new issues that we want to start thinking about/tackling? https://github.com/w3c/pointerevents/issues

Mustaq: not issue related, but about a WPT that fails in all browsers

Mustaq: the test is wrong, but working on it

Mustaq: specific question for Olli - seeing Safari+Chrome fail similarly, but Gecko's behaviour is different

Mustaq: (context is failing test for targets removed from slot ?)

Mustaq: A is host, B inside shadow DOM. you get mouse down/up on B. in Safari/Chrome, the host A sees an actual (fake) event on A, with target A. In Firefox we see it bubbling to A, so target is B

Olli: i think it should behave like Safari/Chrome...

Mustaq: I will send you the test, we can look at it. Question is: are events meant to be "replicated" on host?

Rob: yes we change the target of the event when it goes to the light DOM

Olli: if you have a minimal test case

Olli: even if it's manual

Mustaq: will ping you in IRC

Gaston: is there a specific agenda already set for our meeting at TPAC next week?

Patrick: not crystallised anything yet ... was hoping to play it by ear, more of the same as our regular meetings, just easier to then discuss things while sitting around the same laptop etc. but if anything comes up, I'll send an email/set a proper agenda

Patrick: thank you all, see you physically/virtually next week at TPAC

Summary of action items

  1. discuss labelling/thinslicing/filtering for different levels of PE for the WPT tests at TPAC
Minutes manually created (not a transcript), formatted by scribe.perl version 248 (Mon Oct 27 20:04:16 2025 UTC).

Diagnostics

Maybe present: Gaston, Olli, Patrick, Rob, Robert

All speakers: Gaston, Mustaq, Olli, Patrick, Rob, Robert

Active on IRC: mustaq, Patrick_H_Lauke