IRC log of pointerevents on 2021-11-10
Timestamps are in UTC.
- 15:58:29 [RRSAgent]
- RRSAgent has joined #pointerevents
- 15:58:29 [RRSAgent]
- logging to https://www.w3.org/2021/11/10-pointerevents-irc
- 15:58:44 [Patrick_H_Lauke]
- Meeting: PEWG
- 15:58:49 [Patrick_H_Lauke]
- Chair: Patrick H. Lauke
- 15:58:55 [Patrick_H_Lauke]
- Agenda: https://www.w3.org/events/meetings/9718517d-0e08-4377-bb7c-07332948233b/20211110T110000
- 15:59:09 [Patrick_H_Lauke]
- Scribe: Patrick H. Lauke
- 15:59:17 [Patrick_H_Lauke]
- ScribeNick: Patrick_H_Lauke
- 16:02:37 [flackr]
- flackr has joined #pointerevents
- 16:03:31 [Patrick_H_Lauke]
- present+ flackr
- 16:03:35 [Patrick_H_Lauke]
- present+ smaug
- 16:03:41 [Patrick_H_Lauke]
- present+ plh
- 16:03:47 [Patrick_H_Lauke]
- present+ mustaq
- 16:03:53 [Patrick_H_Lauke]
- TOPIC: Remove should from boundary events note and move to normative must https://github.com/w3c/pointerevents/pull/419
- 16:04:23 [Patrick_H_Lauke]
- pull request in relation to https://github.com/w3c/pointerevents/issues/405
- 16:06:25 [plh]
- plh has joined #pointerevents
- 16:07:18 [Patrick_H_Lauke]
- mustaq: [paraphrased] can we be slightly more explicit instead of just pointing to UI-Events?
- 16:07:50 [Patrick_H_Lauke]
- flackr: i could add that browser should treat captured event as if the pointer/mouse had been moved to that particular element...
- 16:08:10 [Patrick_H_Lauke]
- flackr: i can make a change to the PR though if you leave a comment
- 16:08:50 [Patrick_H_Lauke]
- Patrick: yeah if you want to sort it out in github directly, once we're all happy i'll merge it
- 16:09:10 [Patrick_H_Lauke]
- ACTION: mustaq/flackr/smaug to tweak PR, once ready for merge let Patrick know
- 16:09:28 [Patrick_H_Lauke]
- TOPIC: Why is 'touch-events: pan' not a value? https://github.com/w3c/pointerevents/issues/420 (new)
- 16:12:13 [Patrick_H_Lauke]
- mustaq: does touch-action:pan not map to touch-action:manipulation ?
- 16:12:26 [Patrick_H_Lauke]
- Patrick: not quite, as manipulation allows continuous zooming
- 16:12:29 [Patrick_H_Lauke]
- https://w3c.github.io/pointerevents/#the-touch-action-css-property
- 16:15:52 [Patrick_H_Lauke]
- Patrick: i think adding touch-action: pan as a shorthand for touch-action: pan-x pan-y makes sense, doesn't need any further differentiation/explanation
- 16:16:20 [Patrick_H_Lauke]
- Patrick: the compat spec defines additional touch-action: pinch-zoom but we can't touch that here for ... reasons
- 16:16:37 [Patrick_H_Lauke]
- Oli: concerned about adding this for v3, should it be future?
- 16:16:54 [Patrick_H_Lauke]
- Patrick: agreed, let's mark this as after v3, as otherwise currently we have zero implementation on this
- 16:17:22 [Patrick_H_Lauke]
- flackr: should we also have something about logical direction values?
- 16:17:42 [Patrick_H_Lauke]
- Patrick: i believe we have an open issue for that https://github.com/w3c/pointerevents/issues/272
- 16:18:43 [Patrick_H_Lauke]
- flackr: this will make sense once we get support for logical overflow directions
- 16:19:04 [Patrick_H_Lauke]
- Patrick: that issue also marked future, to be considered once v3 is out
- 16:19:15 [Patrick_H_Lauke]
- ACTION: keep track of issue for future
- 16:20:00 [Patrick_H_Lauke]
- TOPIC: How is pointer event ctor supposed to work when coalescedEvents is passed using the PointerEventInit https://github.com/w3c/pointerevents/issues/223
- 16:20:16 [Patrick_H_Lauke]
- Patrick: wanted to get a sense if we should just park these issues or if they're blockers for v3
- 16:20:44 [Patrick_H_Lauke]
- Oli: i think chrome implementation did something really weird, in firefox it's different weird...
- 16:20:59 [mustaq]
- https://w3c.github.io/pointerevents/#coalesced-events
- 16:21:30 [Patrick_H_Lauke]
- flackr: we expanded spec since then
- 16:21:50 [Patrick_H_Lauke]
- mustaq: does the wording in the spec currently make it good enough (regarding trusted/untrusted events and their initialisation)
- 16:22:14 [flackr]
- Existing spec text has "Untrusted events have their coalesced events list initialized to the value passed to the constructor"
- 16:22:20 [Patrick_H_Lauke]
- Oli: need to write some tests...
- 16:22:29 [Patrick_H_Lauke]
- Oli: but spec might be specific enough now
- 16:24:25 [Patrick_H_Lauke]
- Oli: we can close the issue now, i'll write tests but that's separate from issue
- 16:24:47 [Patrick_H_Lauke]
- Patrick: i see comments from AnneVK about filing issues against DOM though, are they now obsolete?
- 16:25:10 [Patrick_H_Lauke]
- Oli: ah right, that still needs to be tweak how constructor works
- 16:25:29 [Patrick_H_Lauke]
- ACTION: Oli to look at remaining constructor work for #223
- 16:25:45 [Patrick_H_Lauke]
- TOPIC: Changing the DOM hierarchy while handling a "pointerenter" event produces significantly different results across browsers https://github.com/w3c/pointerevents/issues/285
- 16:25:53 [smaug]
- s/Oli/Olli/
- 16:28:44 [Patrick_H_Lauke]
- mustaq: this is really an issue more about UI Events than anything else, but the spec is silent about it too
- 16:29:20 [Patrick_H_Lauke]
- Patrick: but the ball is fundamentally in their court, so should we close this here as it's something that won't just affect pointer events, but mouse etc as well
- 16:30:36 [Patrick_H_Lauke]
- mustaq: Gary mentioned at TPAC about PE hooks, I promised I'd look at this for the algorithm
- 16:31:24 [Patrick_H_Lauke]
- Olli: not sure how algorithm maps to webkit here, but we can review the algorithm first and then see if we need to do anything in PE spec
- 16:32:36 [Patrick_H_Lauke]
- Patrick: is this a blocker for v3? of mark as future?
- 16:33:27 [Patrick_H_Lauke]
- mustaq: the algorithm has been going for months, so not imminent release. so shouldn't block v3
- 16:34:08 [Patrick_H_Lauke]
- ACTION: mark issue for future, so as not to block v3. mustaq to discuss with Gary about algorithm
- 16:34:51 [Patrick_H_Lauke]
- TOPIC: touch-action:none and overflow:auto https://github.com/w3c/pointerevents/issues/319
- 16:40:36 [Patrick_H_Lauke]
- [discussion on what the issue is actually about]
- 16:41:41 [Patrick_H_Lauke]
- flackr: i suspect the gecko behavior is right. we treat scrollable as always scrollable regardless of ancestor touch-action, and scrolling one can lead to scroll chaining...we can recommend that authors put overscroll behaviour to the container with touch-action:none to prevent that behavior
- 16:42:43 [Patrick_H_Lauke]
- Patrick: if we think about this for the next two weeks and at next meeting decide what to do (if we need to add something to spec to cover these edge cases)
- 16:42:54 [Patrick_H_Lauke]
- flackr: there are other situations like with position:sticky
- 16:43:25 [Patrick_H_Lauke]
- ACTION: review #319 for next meeting and see then if we can/should add extra wording to spec for this
- 16:46:14 [flackr]
- position:sticky refers to the nearest ancestor scrollport https://www.w3.org/TR/css-position-3/#valdef-position-sticky where scroll port is defined here: https://drafts.csswg.org/css-overflow-3/#scroll-container
- 16:49:12 [Patrick_H_Lauke]
- Patrick: thank you for joining. see you all in 2 weeks' time for next meeting
- 16:49:41 [Patrick_H_Lauke]
- rrsagent, set logs world-visible
- 16:49:47 [Patrick_H_Lauke]
- rrsagent, create minutes
- 16:49:47 [RRSAgent]
- I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2021/11/10-pointerevents-minutes.html Patrick_H_Lauke
- 16:49:53 [Patrick_H_Lauke]
- rrsagent, set logs world-visible
- 16:54:08 [Patrick_H_Lauke]
- rrsagent, bye
- 16:54:08 [RRSAgent]
- I see 5 open action items saved in https://www.w3.org/2021/11/10-pointerevents-actions.rdf :
- 16:54:08 [RRSAgent]
- ACTION: mustaq/flackr/smaug to tweak PR, once ready for merge let Patrick know [1]
- 16:54:08 [RRSAgent]
- recorded in https://www.w3.org/2021/11/10-pointerevents-irc#T16-09-10
- 16:54:08 [RRSAgent]
- ACTION: keep track of issue for future [2]
- 16:54:08 [RRSAgent]
- recorded in https://www.w3.org/2021/11/10-pointerevents-irc#T16-19-15
- 16:54:08 [RRSAgent]
- ACTION: Oli to look at remaining constructor work for #223 [3]
- 16:54:08 [RRSAgent]
- recorded in https://www.w3.org/2021/11/10-pointerevents-irc#T16-25-29
- 16:54:08 [RRSAgent]
- ACTION: mark issue for future, so as not to block v3. mustaq to discuss with Gary about algorithm [4]
- 16:54:08 [RRSAgent]
- recorded in https://www.w3.org/2021/11/10-pointerevents-irc#T16-34-08
- 16:54:08 [RRSAgent]
- ACTION: review #319 for next meeting and see then if we can/should add extra wording to spec for this [5]
- 16:54:08 [RRSAgent]
- recorded in https://www.w3.org/2021/11/10-pointerevents-irc#T16-43-25