Re: CfC: publish WG Note of UI Events; deadline November 14

[Arthur Barstow]

Hi All,

This CfC (original thread is [1]) is now moving forward and on March 17 
there will be two publications:


1. /UI Events (Keyboard Extension)/; W3C Working Group Note; (draft is 
).


2. /UI Events Specification (formerly DOM Level 3 Events)/; W3C Working 
Draft; (draft is ).


The following redirects will also be made:

1.  will redirect to 
.


2.  will redirect to 
.


-Regards, ArtB

[1] 


On 11/7/14 10:28 AM, Arthur Barstow wrote:
During WebApps' October 27 meeting, the participants agreed to stop 
work on the UI Events spec and to publish it as a WG Note (see 
[Mins]). As such, this is a formal Call for Consensus (CfC) to:


a) Stop work on this spec

b) Publish a "gutted" WG Note of the spec; see [Draft-Note]

c) Gut the ED (this will be done if/when this CfC passes)

d) Prefix the spec's [Bugs] with "HISTORICAL" and turn off creating 
new bugs


e) Travis will move all bugs that are relevant to D3E to the D3E bug 
component


Note Action-734 resulted in a discussion about the rationale for this 
proposal ([Discuss]).


If anyone has comments or concerns about this CfC, please reply by 
November 14 at the latest. Positive response is preferred and 
encouraged and silence will be considered as agreement with the 
proposal. In the absence of any non-resolvable issues, I will see make 
sure the Note is published.


-Thanks, AB

[Mins] http://www.w3.org/2014/10/27-webapps-minutes.html#item05
[Draft-Note] https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/d4e/raw-file/default/tr.html
[Bugs] 
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/buglist.cgi?product=WebAppsWG&component=UI%20Events&resolution=---
[Discuss] 
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2014OctDec/0262.html

Re: CfC: publish WG Note of UI Events; deadline November 14

[Philippe Le Hegaret]

On Wed, 2014-12-10 at 10:22 -0500, Arthur Barstow wrote:
> Hi Travis, Gary, Philippe,
> 
> Since Anne's proposal hasn't been implemented, what exactly is the plan 
> for these two specs?
> 
> There is also a related proposal "DOM L3 Events Input Events Work to the 
> Editing Task Force" by Ben [Ben] and followup by Gary [Gary].
> 
> What do you recommend here, i.e., Who is going to do What and When?

I sent a few questions to the editors on this front but didn't receive
responses. I'd like some guidances here before publishing.

Philippe

Re: CfC: publish WG Note of UI Events; deadline November 14

[Arthur Barstow]

On 11/21/14 8:43 AM, Philippe Le Hegaret wrote:

On Wed, 2014-11-19 at 09:44 -0500, Arthur Barstow wrote:

On 11/19/14 9:35 AM, Anne van Kesteren wrote:

On Wed, Nov 19, 2014 at 3:20 PM, Arthur Barstow  wrote:

Although there appears to be agreement that work on the [uievents] spec
should stop, the various replies raise sufficient questions that I consider
this CfC (as written) as failed.

Travis, Gary - would you please make a specific proposal for these two
specs? In particular, what is the title and shortname for each document, and
which spec/shortname becomes the WG Note?

After we have agreed on a way forward, I'll start a new CfC.

(I believe the Principle of Least Surprise here means considering specs that
currently reference [uievents] or [DOM-Level-3-Events]. F.ex., I suppose a
document titled "UI Events" with a shortname of DOM-Level-3-Events could be
a bit confusing to some, although strictly speaking could be done.)

My proposal would be to update UI Events with the latest editor's
draft of DOM Level 3 Events (title renamed, of course) and have the
DOM Level 3 Events URL redirect to UI Events. That would communicate
clearly what happened.

Yves, Philippe - can Anne's proposal be done?

I'm not aware of any reason that would prevent us from doing so.


Hi Travis, Gary, Philippe,

Since Anne's proposal hasn't been implemented, what exactly is the plan 
for these two specs?


There is also a related proposal "DOM L3 Events Input Events Work to the 
Editing Task Force" by Ben [Ben] and followup by Gary [Gary].


What do you recommend here, i.e., Who is going to do What and When?

-Thanks, ArtB

[Ben] 

[Gary] 

Re: CfC: publish WG Note of UI Events; deadline November 14

[Philippe Le Hegaret]

On Wed, 2014-11-19 at 09:44 -0500, Arthur Barstow wrote:
> On 11/19/14 9:35 AM, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
> > On Wed, Nov 19, 2014 at 3:20 PM, Arthur Barstow  
> > wrote:
> >> Although there appears to be agreement that work on the [uievents] spec
> >> should stop, the various replies raise sufficient questions that I consider
> >> this CfC (as written) as failed.
> >>
> >> Travis, Gary - would you please make a specific proposal for these two
> >> specs? In particular, what is the title and shortname for each document, 
> >> and
> >> which spec/shortname becomes the WG Note?
> >>
> >> After we have agreed on a way forward, I'll start a new CfC.
> >>
> >> (I believe the Principle of Least Surprise here means considering specs 
> >> that
> >> currently reference [uievents] or [DOM-Level-3-Events]. F.ex., I suppose a
> >> document titled "UI Events" with a shortname of DOM-Level-3-Events could be
> >> a bit confusing to some, although strictly speaking could be done.)
> > My proposal would be to update UI Events with the latest editor's
> > draft of DOM Level 3 Events (title renamed, of course) and have the
> > DOM Level 3 Events URL redirect to UI Events. That would communicate
> > clearly what happened.
> 
> Yves, Philippe - can Anne's proposal be done?

I'm not aware of any reason that would prevent us from doing so.

Philippe

Re: CfC: publish WG Note of UI Events; deadline November 14

[Pradeep Kumar]

+1
On 19-Nov-2014 8:07 pm, "Anne van Kesteren"  wrote:

> On Wed, Nov 19, 2014 at 3:20 PM, Arthur Barstow 
> wrote:
> > Although there appears to be agreement that work on the [uievents] spec
> > should stop, the various replies raise sufficient questions that I
> consider
> > this CfC (as written) as failed.
> >
> > Travis, Gary - would you please make a specific proposal for these two
> > specs? In particular, what is the title and shortname for each document,
> and
> > which spec/shortname becomes the WG Note?
> >
> > After we have agreed on a way forward, I'll start a new CfC.
> >
> > (I believe the Principle of Least Surprise here means considering specs
> that
> > currently reference [uievents] or [DOM-Level-3-Events]. F.ex., I suppose
> a
> > document titled "UI Events" with a shortname of DOM-Level-3-Events could
> be
> > a bit confusing to some, although strictly speaking could be done.)
>
> My proposal would be to update UI Events with the latest editor's
> draft of DOM Level 3 Events (title renamed, of course) and have the
> DOM Level 3 Events URL redirect to UI Events. That would communicate
> clearly what happened.
>
>
> --
> https://annevankesteren.nl/
>
>

Re: CfC: publish WG Note of UI Events; deadline November 14

[Arthur Barstow]

On 11/19/14 9:35 AM, Anne van Kesteren wrote:

On Wed, Nov 19, 2014 at 3:20 PM, Arthur Barstow  wrote:

Although there appears to be agreement that work on the [uievents] spec
should stop, the various replies raise sufficient questions that I consider
this CfC (as written) as failed.

Travis, Gary - would you please make a specific proposal for these two
specs? In particular, what is the title and shortname for each document, and
which spec/shortname becomes the WG Note?

After we have agreed on a way forward, I'll start a new CfC.

(I believe the Principle of Least Surprise here means considering specs that
currently reference [uievents] or [DOM-Level-3-Events]. F.ex., I suppose a
document titled "UI Events" with a shortname of DOM-Level-3-Events could be
a bit confusing to some, although strictly speaking could be done.)

My proposal would be to update UI Events with the latest editor's
draft of DOM Level 3 Events (title renamed, of course) and have the
DOM Level 3 Events URL redirect to UI Events. That would communicate
clearly what happened.


Yves, Philippe - can Anne's proposal be done?

Re: CfC: publish WG Note of UI Events; deadline November 14

[Anne van Kesteren]

On Wed, Nov 19, 2014 at 3:20 PM, Arthur Barstow  wrote:
> Although there appears to be agreement that work on the [uievents] spec
> should stop, the various replies raise sufficient questions that I consider
> this CfC (as written) as failed.
>
> Travis, Gary - would you please make a specific proposal for these two
> specs? In particular, what is the title and shortname for each document, and
> which spec/shortname becomes the WG Note?
>
> After we have agreed on a way forward, I'll start a new CfC.
>
> (I believe the Principle of Least Surprise here means considering specs that
> currently reference [uievents] or [DOM-Level-3-Events]. F.ex., I suppose a
> document titled "UI Events" with a shortname of DOM-Level-3-Events could be
> a bit confusing to some, although strictly speaking could be done.)

My proposal would be to update UI Events with the latest editor's
draft of DOM Level 3 Events (title renamed, of course) and have the
DOM Level 3 Events URL redirect to UI Events. That would communicate
clearly what happened.


-- 
https://annevankesteren.nl/

Re: CfC: publish WG Note of UI Events; deadline November 14

[Arthur Barstow]

On 11/7/14 10:28 AM, Arthur Barstow wrote:
During WebApps' October 27 meeting, the participants agreed to stop 
work on the UI Events spec and to publish it as a WG Note (see 
[Mins]). As such, this is a formal Call for Consensus (CfC) to:


a) Stop work on this spec

b) Publish a "gutted" WG Note of the spec; see [Draft-Note]

c) Gut the ED (this will be done if/when this CfC passes)

d) Prefix the spec's [Bugs] with "HISTORICAL" and turn off creating 
new bugs


e) Travis will move all bugs that are relevant to D3E to the D3E bug 
component



Although there appears to be agreement that work on the [uievents] spec 
should stop, the various replies raise sufficient questions that I 
consider this CfC (as written) as failed.


Travis, Gary - would you please make a specific proposal for these two 
specs? In particular, what is the title and shortname for each document, 
and which spec/shortname becomes the WG Note?


After we have agreed on a way forward, I'll start a new CfC.

(I believe the Principle of Least Surprise here means considering specs 
that currently reference [uievents] or [DOM-Level-3-Events]. F.ex., I 
suppose a document titled "UI Events" with a shortname of 
DOM-Level-3-Events could be a bit confusing to some, although strictly 
speaking could be done.)


-Thanks, AB

[uievents] http://www.w3.org/TR/uievents/
[DOM-Level-3-Events] http://www.w3.org/TR/DOM-Level-3-Events/



[Mins] http://www.w3.org/2014/10/27-webapps-minutes.html#item05
[Draft-Note] https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/d4e/raw-file/default/tr.html
[Bugs] 
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/buglist.cgi?product=WebAppsWG&component=UI%20Events&resolution=---
[Discuss] 
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2014OctDec/0262.html

Re: CfC: publish WG Note of UI Events; deadline November 14

[Кошмарчик]

On Fri, Nov 7, 2014 at 7:36 AM, Anne van Kesteren  wrote:

> On Fri, Nov 7, 2014 at 4:28 PM, Arthur Barstow 
> wrote:
> > If anyone has comments or concerns about this CfC, please reply by
> November
> > 14 at the latest.
>
> My concern is that we previously agreed that UI Events would be a much
> more suitable name for the contents of DOM Level 3 Events.


I agree. "UI Events" is a much more descriptive name for the content.

My primary concern is that we (specifically, "I") have been telling people
that UI Events is not the same as D3E. If we change this, then I'll have to
have those conversations all over again, but reversed. ^_^

But we
> would keep using DOM Level 3 Events because it would be done quickly
> and then we'd move on to UI Events. As we now know we did not finish
> DOM Level 3 Events quickly.


FWIW, we pushed to have it done quickly and it was delayed:
(1) once because the spec was a step backward from DOM2 in some regards and
that needed to be fixed,
(2) again because there was feedback that style and presentation should be
updated to match more recent specs.

#2 is when the WG effectively decided that cleaning up the presentation was
more important than releasing it quickly.

So I would like us to abandon that name
> and settle on UI Events.
>

SGTM.

With regards to the current contents of UI Events, I assume that publishing
a "gutted WD Note" is meant simply to establish a historical record of what
was worked on before the content is deleted?  When we were focusing on
completing the D3E spec quickly, this is where we sent items that we felt
should be part of D3E, but would take too much time to finalize. We'll want
to reconsider some of these items for inclusion back in D3E (er... I mean
UI Events).

-Gary

Re: CfC: publish WG Note of UI Events; deadline November 14

[Anne van Kesteren]

On Sun, Nov 9, 2014 at 5:08 PM, Arthur Barstow  wrote:
> Please provide a link to that agreement.

http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-dom/2013JanMar/thread.html#msg21
is the last time we discussed it. I'm pretty sure it was discussed
before that point as well, but maybe that was informally face-to-face.


-- 
https://annevankesteren.nl/

Re: CfC: publish WG Note of UI Events; deadline November 14

[Arthur Barstow]

On 11/7/14 10:36 AM, Anne van Kesteren wrote:

On Fri, Nov 7, 2014 at 4:28 PM, Arthur Barstow  wrote:

If anyone has comments or concerns about this CfC, please reply by November
14 at the latest.

My concern is that we previously agreed that UI Events would be a much
more suitable name for the contents of DOM Level 3 Events.


Please provide a link to that agreement.


But we would keep using DOM Level 3 Events because it would be done quickly
and then we'd move on to UI Events. As we now know we did not finish
DOM Level 3 Events quickly. So I would like us to abandon that name
and settle on UI Events.


Travis, Gary - what are your thoughts on Anne's proposal?

-Thanks, AB

RE: CfC: publish WG Note of UI Events; deadline November 14

[Travis Leithead]

To clarify: are you asking to rename "DOM Level 3 Events" to "UI Events"? 

Perhaps a fresh name would help get that spec done faster :)

Gary what do you think?

-Original Message-
From: annevankeste...@gmail.com [mailto:annevankeste...@gmail.com] On Behalf Of 
Anne van Kesteren
Sent: Friday, November 7, 2014 7:36 AM
To: Arthur Barstow
Cc: public-webapps; www-...@w3.org
Subject: Re: CfC: publish WG Note of UI Events; deadline November 14

On Fri, Nov 7, 2014 at 4:28 PM, Arthur Barstow  wrote:
> If anyone has comments or concerns about this CfC, please reply by 
> November
> 14 at the latest.

My concern is that we previously agreed that UI Events would be a much more 
suitable name for the contents of DOM Level 3 Events. But we would keep using 
DOM Level 3 Events because it would be done quickly and then we'd move on to UI 
Events. As we now know we did not finish DOM Level 3 Events quickly. So I would 
like us to abandon that name and settle on UI Events.


--
https://annevankesteren.nl/

Re: CfC: publish WG Note of UI Events; deadline November 14

[Anne van Kesteren]

On Fri, Nov 7, 2014 at 4:28 PM, Arthur Barstow  wrote:
> If anyone has comments or concerns about this CfC, please reply by November
> 14 at the latest.

My concern is that we previously agreed that UI Events would be a much
more suitable name for the contents of DOM Level 3 Events. But we
would keep using DOM Level 3 Events because it would be done quickly
and then we'd move on to UI Events. As we now know we did not finish
DOM Level 3 Events quickly. So I would like us to abandon that name
and settle on UI Events.


-- 
https://annevankesteren.nl/

CfC: publish WG Note of UI Events; deadline November 14

[Arthur Barstow]

During WebApps' October 27 meeting, the participants agreed to stop work 
on the UI Events spec and to publish it as a WG Note (see [Mins]). As 
such, this is a formal Call for Consensus (CfC) to:


a) Stop work on this spec

b) Publish a "gutted" WG Note of the spec; see [Draft-Note]

c) Gut the ED (this will be done if/when this CfC passes)

d) Prefix the spec's [Bugs] with "HISTORICAL" and turn off creating new bugs

e) Travis will move all bugs that are relevant to D3E to the D3E bug 
component


Note Action-734 resulted in a discussion about the rationale for this 
proposal ([Discuss]).


If anyone has comments or concerns about this CfC, please reply by 
November 14 at the latest. Positive response is preferred and encouraged 
and silence will be considered as agreement with the proposal. In the 
absence of any non-resolvable issues, I will see make sure the Note is 
published.


-Thanks, AB

[Mins] http://www.w3.org/2014/10/27-webapps-minutes.html#item05
[Draft-Note] https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/d4e/raw-file/default/tr.html
[Bugs] 
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/buglist.cgi?product=WebAppsWG&component=UI%20Events&resolution=---
[Discuss] 
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2014OctDec/0262.html