Closed RByers closed 9 years ago
Wondering if it's worth also just renaming touchevents.html
to just index.html
, but otherwise this looks good to me in principle
Good question. It's probably easiest to do that as a 2nd step if we want to. I don't have a strong preference for use of index.html or not - either way seems to have it's own small advantages.
Additionally: should the text contain some small nod/reference to the fact that the TE extensions from http://www.w3.org/TR/touch-events-extensions/ have been rolled into this? Maybe just in the intro or references?
Additionally: should the text contain some small nod/reference to the fact that the TE extensions from http://www.w3.org/TR/touch-events-extensions/ have been rolled into this? Maybe just in the intro or references?
Probably a good idea, thanks. How's this for now (figured "status of this document" was probably the right place)? We can continue to tweak the exact format after this lands (looks like we probably have other tweaks to make to reflect that this is a level 2 doc, but I'm not familiar enough with the normal process to know how best to do that.
LGTM for the moment, yup
Thanks. Not hearing other feedback, I'm going to go ahead and merge this now to unblock other changes.
As discussed on public-touchevents we've decided that we won't be able to publish the v1 changes as an 'errata' after all. So merge the v1-arrata and touch event extensions note into "Touch Events - Level 2".
This directly copies the extensions into the v1-errata document. I made one change: "Issue: Consider aligning with other "channels" and values from InkML" etc. as I think it's obsolete (it's highly unlikely that we'd add any additional properties to Touch at this point).
You can see the result here.