15:54:08 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #pointerevents
15:54:12 <RRSAgent> logging to https://www.w3.org/2023/03/01-pointerevents-irc
15:59:23 <flackr> flackr has joined #pointerevents
16:01:07 <Patrick_H_Lauke> Meeting: PEWG
16:01:12 <Patrick_H_Lauke> Chair: Patrick H. Lauke
16:01:27 <Patrick_H_Lauke> Agenda: https://www.w3.org/events/meetings/a81709f0-4b0c-48a7-afa9-36828ab63073/20230301T110000
16:01:37 <Patrick_H_Lauke> Scribe: Patrick H. Lauke
16:01:44 <Patrick_H_Lauke> ScribeNick: Patrick_H_Lauke
16:01:46 <Patrick_H_Lauke> present+
16:02:58 <Patrick_H_Lauke> present+ flackr
16:03:03 <Patrick_H_Lauke> present+ mustaq
16:04:12 <Patrick_H_Lauke> TOPIC: Coordinates of a pointercancel event https://github.com/w3c/pointerevents/issues/463
16:04:21 <Patrick_H_Lauke> Review/discuss proposed PR https://github.com/w3c/pointerevents/pull/464
16:05:05 <Patrick_H_Lauke> Mustaq made a suggestion/comment here https://github.com/w3c/pointerevents/issues/463#issuecomment-1431792215
16:06:30 <Patrick_H_Lauke> Mustaq: when i look at pointerup and pointercancel, i wonder if we want to change pointerup the same way as well
16:07:04 <Patrick_H_Lauke> Rob: we made conscious decision to go with 0 for pointerup, as it makes sense from an event stream perspective
16:07:37 <Patrick_H_Lauke> Rob: in my mind it makes sense that they're not identical (pointerup being empty, pointercancel carrying the last known good values)
16:08:35 <Patrick_H_Lauke> Mustaq: thinking about perspective of spec maintenance. we now list a bunch of properties... developers can get those values by just checking the last pointermove
16:08:44 <mustaq> https://pr-preview.s3.amazonaws.com/w3c/pointerevents/464/ed733e3...1aefdf1.html
16:08:54 <Patrick_H_Lauke> Mustaq: so is this not an edge case that makes the spec bulkier for no actual developer gain
16:09:52 <Patrick_H_Lauke> Mustaq: concerned that if the spec changes in future, we may go out of sync
16:10:03 <Patrick_H_Lauke> Rob: what are you suggesting?
16:10:19 <Patrick_H_Lauke> Mustaq: we're changing spec without any benefit (to developers)
16:10:49 <Patrick_H_Lauke> Mustaq: we can motivate developers to just listen to pointermove, and not pointercancel
16:13:45 <Patrick_H_Lauke> Patrick: I made it quite explicit, listing all properties, and explicitly saying coalescedEvents and predictedEvents will be empty, to avoid handwavy confusion later on.
16:14:34 <Patrick_H_Lauke> Patrick: I conceptually quite like this, as I can imagine as a developer maybe you're not been following EVERY pointermove, but when you get a pointercancel you want to make absolutely sure you "clean up house" on whatever you were doing just when the cancel happened
16:17:39 <Patrick_H_Lauke> [discussion about consistency: with the proposed change to pointercancel, we specify values for pointercancel. but for pointerup, we say pressure is zero in the pressure property definition as a note]
16:18:03 <Patrick_H_Lauke> Patrick: happy to move the note from 4.1 where it talks about pressure to a similar matching paragraph in the pointerup event description. does that make sense?
16:18:09 <Patrick_H_Lauke> [mustaq and rob agree]
16:19:01 <Patrick_H_Lauke> ACTION: merge the proposed PR, patrick to create matching/similar PR to move note about pressure into pointerup definition
16:19:37 <Patrick_H_Lauke> TOPIC: Wacom Airbrush and tangentialPressure
16:19:37 <Patrick_H_Lauke> https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-pointer-events/2023JanMar/0041.html
16:23:54 <mustaq> https://chromestatus.com/feature/5765742146355200
16:24:10 <Patrick_H_Lauke> Mustaq: we shipped tangentialPressure and twist together, but it may be incomplete
16:25:56 <Patrick_H_Lauke> Patrick: problem is likely that there's not many devices that have this
16:26:16 <Patrick_H_Lauke> Patrick: will ping Olli separately to see if he knows why it's not in Firefox implementation either
16:26:58 <Patrick_H_Lauke> ACTION: Mustaq/Patrick/Olli to investigate if implementation is incomplete in browsers
16:27:12 <mustaq> https://github.com/w3c/pointerevents/pull/403#issuecomment-1450335194
16:28:11 <Patrick_H_Lauke> TOPIC: should note be normative...
16:28:37 <Patrick_H_Lauke> Mustaq: if i search spec for passive, I only see this one mention. did we want to make the note normative or did we consciously choose to make it non-normative?
16:29:23 <Patrick_H_Lauke> Patrick: so looking in section 11 https://pr-preview.s3.amazonaws.com/w3c/pointerevents/464/ed733e3...1aefdf1.html#compatibility-mapping-with-mouse-events the note: Compatibility mouse events can't be prevented when a pointer event EventListener is set to be passive [ DOM ].
16:32:31 <Patrick_H_Lauke> Patrick: I'm happy to make this an actual normative prose, not a non-normative note. don't think there was any actual reason/rationale for us to make it a note...
16:32:50 <mustaq> Sounds good, I will add a test soon accordingly.
16:33:02 <Patrick_H_Lauke> Patrick: noting that the entire section 11 is OPTIONAL, but that should not prevent us from making this normative text (normative as in "IF a UA does this, THEN this is normative")
16:34:19 <Patrick_H_Lauke> ACTION: remove the "note" bit, and make this part of the normative text
16:34:54 <Patrick_H_Lauke> TOPIC: Meta-issue: update WPT to cover Pointer Events Level 3 https://github.com/w3c/pointerevents/issues/445
16:35:14 <Patrick_H_Lauke> Patrick: I see that work has been progressing nicely on this, so no concerns
16:35:31 <Patrick_H_Lauke> Mustaq: have been working on 3 at the moment, will carry on
16:35:42 <mustaq> I am working on #403, #404 and #457
16:35:45 <Github> https://github.com/w3c/pointerevents/pull/403 : Expand prose about preventing compatibility mouse events and make it normative
16:35:45 <Github> https://github.com/w3c/pointerevents/pull/404 : Add note about rounding coordinates for click, auxclick, contextmenu
16:35:45 <Github> https://github.com/w3c/pointerevents/issues/457 : pointerout even if the pointer doesn't move?
16:36:02 <Patrick_H_Lauke> Patrick: and I know Olli has been working on a few
16:36:51 <Patrick_H_Lauke> TOPIC: Heartbeat: Clarify what the target of the click event should be after capturing pointer events https://github.com/w3c/pointerevents/issues/356
16:37:53 <Patrick_H_Lauke> Patrick: I know there's not been movement. Suggest that once we closed all other issues, we have a meeting to decide what to do with this in the meantime (deferring to next version and explicitly mentioning it in spec, for instance)
16:39:03 <Patrick_H_Lauke> Patrick: if there's no further issues, we'll adjurn for now. Thank you both
16:39:09 <Patrick_H_Lauke> rrsagent, set logs world-visible
16:39:16 <Patrick_H_Lauke> rrsagent, generate minutes
16:39:17 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2023/03/01-pointerevents-minutes.html Patrick_H_Lauke
16:39:25 <Patrick_H_Lauke> rrsagent, set logs world-visible
16:39:34 <Patrick_H_Lauke> rrsagent, bye
16:39:34 <RRSAgent> I see 3 open action items saved in https://www.w3.org/2023/03/01-pointerevents-actions.rdf :
16:39:34 <RRSAgent> ACTION: merge the proposed PR, patrick to create matching/similar PR to move note about pressure into pointerup definition [1]
16:39:34 <RRSAgent>   recorded in https://www.w3.org/2023/03/01-pointerevents-irc#T16-19-01
16:39:34 <RRSAgent> ACTION: Mustaq/Patrick/Olli to investigate if implementation is incomplete in browsers [2]
16:39:34 <RRSAgent>   recorded in https://www.w3.org/2023/03/01-pointerevents-irc#T16-26-58
16:39:34 <RRSAgent> ACTION: remove the "note" bit, and make this part of the normative text [3]
16:39:34 <RRSAgent>   recorded in https://www.w3.org/2023/03/01-pointerevents-irc#T16-34-19