IRC log of pointerevents on 2023-03-01
Timestamps are in UTC.
- 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