Re: [selection-api] Moving toward First Public Working Draft
Publishing an FPWD sounds reasonable. On Sat, Sep 20, 2014 at 9:52 PM, Arthur Barstow art.bars...@gmail.com wrote: Hi Ryosuke, Ben, Kenji, All, I'm looking for feedback about moving the Selection API [ED] to First Public Working Draft (FPWD) ... A `rule of thumb` I generally use when considering if a spec is ready for a FPWD is if the feature set is mostly complete although there is no expectation all features are fleshed out in detail (IOW, looking for breadth mostly complete but not depth). The breadth question is important because a FPWD is also used as an attorney snapshot vis-à-vis the [PP]. Regarding the spec's open [Issues], there is no expectation a FPWD be bug/issue free (in fact, it would be rare if that was the case). What are your thoughts about publishing a FPWD? Do you consider the latest ED to be feature complete; and if not, what major features are missing? -Thanks, AB [ED] http://w3c.github.io/selection-api/ [Issues] https://github.com/w3c/selection-api/issues [PP] http://www.w3.org/Consortium/Patent-Policy/ -- Kenji BAHEUX Product Manager - Chrome Google Japan
Re: [Editing] Splitting Selection API Into a Separate Specification
Looking into selection in this brave new world (Shadow DOM for sure, but there are issues as well with flexbox if I'm not mistaken), is definitely something we are interested in. We haven't gotten around it yet which I believe explain our lack of feedback so far. 2014-03-14 8:43 GMT+09:00 Ryosuke Niwa rn...@apple.com: Hi, It appears that there is a lot of new features such as CSS regions and shadow DOM that have significant implications on selection API, and we really need a spec. for selection API these specifications can refer to. Thankfully, Aryeh has done a great work writing the spec. for selection API as a part of HTML Editing APIs specification [1] but no browser vendor has been able to give meaningful feedback or has implemented the spec due to the inherent complexity in HTML editing. As a result, the specification hasn't made much progress towards reaching Last Call or CR. Given the situation, I think it's valuable to extract the parts of the spec that defines selection API into its own specification and move it forward in the standards process so that we can make it more interoperable between browsers, and let CSS regions, shadow DOM, and other specifications refer to the specification. Any thoughts and opinions? [1] https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/editing/raw-file/tip/editing.html - R. Niwa
Re: [IME] Preparing some feedback
Thanks Travis. We are eager to hear your feedback. The spec was down scoped to exclude Javascript based IME because we could not find any compelling use case but we would be happy to reconsider if you do. 2013/3/30 Travis Leithead travis.leith...@microsoft.com Thanks for submitting these updates to the Input Method Editor API. I've had an opportunity to review them and would like to offer some feedback for the spec. On the IE team, we have also been working on building an IME-related API, but one geared specifically toward working with the operating system's IME (vs. a JavaScript-implemented IME). Long term, we think that it makes sense to have an IME API Spec that supports both system and JavaScript-based IME scenarios. We would like to work with you to land on a unified design that includes the right set of API for working with both system and JavaScript-based IMEs. We'll write up a proposal to start the discussion. Thanks, Travis -- Kenji BAHEUX Product Manager - Chrome Google Japan
[IME API] Our plan to move the spec forward in light of our F2F discussion
Happy new year! At our last F2F, I gave examples of use cases that would benefit from better interactions with IMEs and asked for the WG's opinion. In light of the feedback (see minutes), we have decided to focus our effort on the use case around positioning (e.g. avoiding the UX overlap issue that typically occur between the IME candidates/UI and the webapp's suggestions/UI). We'll have an updated draft of the spec scoped down to this particular use case by the end of January. Feel free to follow along and reach out with any suggestions/questions you may have. TPAC minutes: http://www.w3.org/2012/10/30-webapps-minutes.html#item04 Note: we'll put the remaining use cases on the side and hopefully reconsider them in a follow up effort. Thanks.
