Re: CFC

[marcos]

> On 25 May 2016, at 3:54 AM, Léonie Watson  wrote:
> 
> Hello WP,
> 
> At the AC meeting in March 2016 the WP co-chairs indicated that the
> Packaging on the Web specification [1] would benefit from further incubation
> before continuing along the Recommendation track.
> 
> This is a CFC to publish Packaging on the Web as a W3C note.

We generally "gut" Notes to avoid confusion and prevent implementation. It 
might be fine to gut it if there is no implementer interest (particularly give 
Service Workers and HTTP2). 

But then, we should not use "incubation" as a euphemism for "no one is going to 
implement this and we don't want it" as it demeans the work of groups like the 
WIGC - that actually do incubation. At least, I will strongly object to the use 
of that word if your intention is to kill the spec. 

So, what then is the real reason for WP terminating work on the spec? Can we 
see the minutes from the rationale given to the AC? 

> If the CFC
> passes, the transition of the specification to note status will be done
> within the current WP WG charter.
> 
> If you have comments or concerns about this CFC, please send them to
> public-webapps@w3.org no later than 2nd June 2016. Positive responses are
> preferred and encouraged, but silence will be considered as agreement with
> the proposal.

Is the plan then to transition it to the WICG for incubation? If so, we can 
just take it and there is no need for process - but we only take it if there is 
actual implementer interest and not if it's not going anywhere. 

> 
> Léonie on behalf of the WP chairs and team.
> [1] http://w3ctag.github.io/packaging-on-the-web/ 
> 
> -- 
> @LeonieWatson tink.uk Carpe diem
> 
> 
> 
> 

RE: CFC: Convert Packaging on the Web to a W3C note

[Léonie Watson]

With the subject line repaired this time...


> -Original Message-
> From: Léonie Watson [mailto:t...@tink.uk]
> Sent: 24 May 2016 18:54
> To: public-webapps@w3.org
> Subject: CFC
> 
> Hello WP,
> 
> At the AC meeting in March 2016 the WP co-chairs indicated that the
> Packaging on the Web specification [1] would benefit from further
incubation
> before continuing along the Recommendation track.
> 
> This is a CFC to publish Packaging on the Web as a W3C note. If the CFC
> passes, the transition of the specification to note status will be done
within
> the current WP WG charter.
> 
> If you have comments or concerns about this CFC, please send them to
> public-webapps@w3.org no later than 2nd June 2016. Positive responses are
> preferred and encouraged, but silence will be considered as agreement with
> the proposal.
> 
> Léonie on behalf of the WP chairs and team.
> [1] http://w3ctag.github.io/packaging-on-the-web/
> 
> --
> @LeonieWatson tink.uk Carpe diem
> 
> 
> 

Re: [webvr] [gamepad] Missing VRPose for tracked controllers

[Florian Bösch]

On Tue, May 24, 2016 at 8:50 PM, Brandon Jones  wrote:
>
> but Yaw probably just initializes to whatever position the user started
> with.
>
Applications for these kinds of controllers usually have some "reset
forward" thing. Sometimes the settings of the device do (as is the case
with Oculuses HMD), sometimes it's up to programmers of the application to
do it (as was the case with the dk1, dk2). The Razer Hydra had some
calibration utility. I'd expect Sixsense to come with an SDK where users
can configure their space.

Re: [webvr] [gamepad] Missing VRPose for tracked controllers

[Brandon Jones]

Position/Orientation/Acceleration can always be reported as NULL, so that's
what I would expect from controllers that don't support a particular pose
value. That's a bit of a pain to use for feature detection purposes,
though, so maybe a more explicit caps would be nice?

As for determining what the controllers are relative to, that's a good
question. We'll have the vrDisplayID for controllers that are associated
with an HMD, which I think implies that they're in the same space as the
HMD. Not sure what makes sense for, say, a Wii controller. Pitch and Roll
are always relative to gravity, but Yaw probably just initializes to
whatever position the user started with.

On Tue, May 24, 2016 at 2:39 PM Justin Rogers  wrote:

> Apologies if this comes across twice - the mailing list rejected my first
> attempt :-)
>
> Do we need to know if a given Gamepad is orientation only versus
> position+orientation? I'm seeing a lot of devices that only know their
> orientation and we could detect this by a 0,0,0 position, but having a flag
> telling me if position will change could be useful. I just did a quick
> review and I didn't see anything that would help me here.
>
> Also, what about devices where the controllers report relative to the HMD
> and the HMD is relative to world space? Do we want any new prose on VRPose
> that covers these potentially more complicated scenarios?
> On Tue, May 24, 2016 at 11:12 AM, Kearwood "Kip" Gilbert <
> kgilb...@mozilla.com> wrote:
>
>> Brandon Jones (Google) has made some experimental WebVR Chromium builds
>> that include support for the HTC Vive VR motion controls.  We would like to
>> propose this as a standard and update to the GamePad API.
>>
>> Brandon has started a thread on w3.org that gives some background:
>>
>> https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2016AprJun/0052.html
>>
>> The WebVR API 1.0 has already extended the GamePad API by adding a
>> “displayID” attribute:
>>
>> https://mozvr.com/webvr-spec/#interface-gamepad
>>
>> The proposal is to take this further and expose an optional “pose”
>> attribute, which would return the same attributes within the VRPose:
>>
>> https://mozvr.com/webvr-spec/#interface-vrpose
>>
>> Cheers,
>>  - Kearwood “Kip” Gilbert
>>Platform Engineer, Mozilla VR Team
>>
>> On May 24, 2016, at 12:22 AM, Sven Neuhaus  wrote:
>>
>> Hello Florian,
>>
>> Thanks for pointing out the WebVR spec draft.
>>
>> The WebVR draft dated April 1st contains a Gamepad interface expansion
>> (§2.11), however it only extends it by a DisplayId.
>> It should also add a VRPose for tracked controllers.
>>
>> I think adding a VRPose could have benefits for non-VR applications as
>> well (think about the Nintendo Wii controllers!), however. So my
>> suggestion to add it to the Gamepad API still stands.
>>
>> Regards,
>> -Sven Neuhaus
>>
>> Am 23.05.2016 um 15:52 schrieb Florian Bösch:
>>
>> The WebVR API models HMD pose and will model the gesture controllers.
>> https://mozvr.com/webvr-spec/
>>
>> On Tue, May 17, 2016 at 9:41 AM, Sven Neuhaus > > wrote:
>>
>>
>>I read the gamepad API description at
>>https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/API/Gamepad
>>
>>I think the gamepad API should support a VRpose for gamepad controllers
>>like the ones included with the HTC Vive and the upcoming Oculus Touch
>>controllers.
>>
>>I suggest that you add a getPose() method that returns a VRPose object
>>for controllers that support tracking.
>>
>>The "orientation" property of the VRPose object could also be useful
>> for
>>some gamepads that include IMUs for orientation tracking.
>>
>>
>> ___
>> web-vr-discuss mailing list
>> web-vr-disc...@mozilla.org
>> https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/web-vr-discuss
>>
>>
>>
>> ___
>> web-vr-discuss mailing list
>> web-vr-disc...@mozilla.org
>> https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/web-vr-discuss
>>
>> ___
> web-vr-discuss mailing list
> web-vr-disc...@mozilla.org
> https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/web-vr-discuss
>

Re: [webvr] Re: [gamepad] Missing VRPose for tracked controllers

[Kearwood "Kip" Gilbert]

Brandon Jones (Google) has made some experimental WebVR Chromium builds that 
include support for the HTC Vive VR motion controls.  We would like to propose 
this as a standard and update to the GamePad API.

Brandon has started a thread on w3.org  that gives some 
background:

https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2016AprJun/0052.html 


The WebVR API 1.0 has already extended the GamePad API by adding a “displayID” 
attribute:

https://mozvr.com/webvr-spec/#interface-gamepad 


The proposal is to take this further and expose an optional “pose” attribute, 
which would return the same attributes within the VRPose:

https://mozvr.com/webvr-spec/#interface-vrpose 


Cheers,
 - Kearwood “Kip” Gilbert
   Platform Engineer, Mozilla VR Team

> On May 24, 2016, at 12:22 AM, Sven Neuhaus  wrote:
> 
> Hello Florian,
> 
> Thanks for pointing out the WebVR spec draft.
> 
> The WebVR draft dated April 1st contains a Gamepad interface expansion
> (§2.11), however it only extends it by a DisplayId.
> It should also add a VRPose for tracked controllers.
> 
> I think adding a VRPose could have benefits for non-VR applications as
> well (think about the Nintendo Wii controllers!), however. So my
> suggestion to add it to the Gamepad API still stands.
> 
> Regards,
> -Sven Neuhaus
> 
> Am 23.05.2016 um 15:52 schrieb Florian Bösch:
>> The WebVR API models HMD pose and will model the gesture controllers.
>> https://mozvr.com/webvr-spec/
>> 
>> On Tue, May 17, 2016 at 9:41 AM, Sven Neuhaus > > wrote:
> 
>>I read the gamepad API description at
>>https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/API/Gamepad
>> 
>>I think the gamepad API should support a VRpose for gamepad controllers
>>like the ones included with the HTC Vive and the upcoming Oculus Touch
>>controllers.
>> 
>>I suggest that you add a getPose() method that returns a VRPose object
>>for controllers that support tracking.
>> 
>>The "orientation" property of the VRPose object could also be useful for
>>some gamepads that include IMUs for orientation tracking.
> 
> ___
> web-vr-discuss mailing list
> web-vr-disc...@mozilla.org
> https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/web-vr-discuss

CFC

[Léonie Watson]

Hello WP,

At the AC meeting in March 2016 the WP co-chairs indicated that the
Packaging on the Web specification [1] would benefit from further incubation
before continuing along the Recommendation track.

This is a CFC to publish Packaging on the Web as a W3C note. If the CFC
passes, the transition of the specification to note status will be done
within the current WP WG charter.

If you have comments or concerns about this CFC, please send them to
public-webapps@w3.org no later than 2nd June 2016. Positive responses are
preferred and encouraged, but silence will be considered as agreement with
the proposal.

Léonie on behalf of the WP chairs and team.
[1] http://w3ctag.github.io/packaging-on-the-web/ 

-- 
@LeonieWatson tink.uk Carpe diem

Re: [gamepad] Missing VRPose for tracked controllers

[Sven Neuhaus]

Hello,

Am 24.05.2016 um 09:38 schrieb Florian Bösch:
> You should discuss this on the WebVR ML as well, it's the main
> communication channel for that, and since it has impact on their
> spec it should be coordinated.

I looked at the archive and saw that Brandon Jones already made a good
proposal regarding the missing pose so I think we can end this thread here.

As I said earlier, working with controllers with IMUs makes sense even
without WebVR so I think the Gamepad API is the right place to add it,
not the WebVR API.
I did send an email to the WebVR API list to get their feedback.

-Sven

Re: [webvr] Re: [gamepad] Missing VRPose for tracked controllers

[Florian Bösch]

You should discuss this on the WebVR ML as well, it's the main
communication channel for that, and since it has impact on their spec it
should be coordinated.

On Tue, May 24, 2016 at 9:22 AM, Sven Neuhaus  wrote:

> Hello Florian,
>
> Thanks for pointing out the WebVR spec draft.
>
> The WebVR draft dated April 1st contains a Gamepad interface expansion
> (§2.11), however it only extends it by a DisplayId.
> It should also add a VRPose for tracked controllers.
>
> I think adding a VRPose could have benefits for non-VR applications as
> well (think about the Nintendo Wii controllers!), however. So my
> suggestion to add it to the Gamepad API still stands.
>
> Regards,
> -Sven Neuhaus
>
> Am 23.05.2016 um 15:52 schrieb Florian Bösch:
> > The WebVR API models HMD pose and will model the gesture controllers.
> > https://mozvr.com/webvr-spec/
> >
> > On Tue, May 17, 2016 at 9:41 AM, Sven Neuhaus  > > wrote:
>
> > I read the gamepad API description at
> > https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/API/Gamepad
> >
> > I think the gamepad API should support a VRpose for gamepad
> controllers
> > like the ones included with the HTC Vive and the upcoming Oculus
> Touch
> > controllers.
> >
> > I suggest that you add a getPose() method that returns a VRPose
> object
> > for controllers that support tracking.
> >
> > The "orientation" property of the VRPose object could also be useful
> for
> > some gamepads that include IMUs for orientation tracking.
>
>

[webvr] Re: [gamepad] Missing VRPose for tracked controllers

[Sven Neuhaus]

Hello Florian,

Thanks for pointing out the WebVR spec draft.

The WebVR draft dated April 1st contains a Gamepad interface expansion
(§2.11), however it only extends it by a DisplayId.
It should also add a VRPose for tracked controllers.

I think adding a VRPose could have benefits for non-VR applications as
well (think about the Nintendo Wii controllers!), however. So my
suggestion to add it to the Gamepad API still stands.

Regards,
-Sven Neuhaus

Am 23.05.2016 um 15:52 schrieb Florian Bösch:
> The WebVR API models HMD pose and will model the gesture controllers.
> https://mozvr.com/webvr-spec/
> 
> On Tue, May 17, 2016 at 9:41 AM, Sven Neuhaus  > wrote:

> I read the gamepad API description at
> https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/API/Gamepad
> 
> I think the gamepad API should support a VRpose for gamepad controllers
> like the ones included with the HTC Vive and the upcoming Oculus Touch
> controllers.
> 
> I suggest that you add a getPose() method that returns a VRPose object
> for controllers that support tracking.
> 
> The "orientation" property of the VRPose object could also be useful for
> some gamepads that include IMUs for orientation tracking.