Travis: Just as a FYI, it's now called WebXR. The one bit is that there is discussion on making a extended or better gamepad API for new types of controllers.

Dan: Is this extending on the original gamepad API?

Travis: The last time I discussed this it seemed like that the gamepad API wasn't great - and needed to be reworked. There is room for building something that isn't just an array of buttons. Not sure who is the best to do this.

Dan: My concern is that WebXR shouldn't be working on their own gamepad API.

Travis: I agree. The new gamepad API shouldn't be explicitly for just WebXR.

Yves: Would it make sense for the TAG to look into the current specs and try to find what the common ground is, and what is missing on either side?

Travis: I think that should be something we should be looking into, rather than chase the rAF bunny.

Yves: Maybe look at this during on the F2F?

Sangwhan: I can volunteer to look into this before the F2F.

Travis: I think I should file some spin-off issues and get the official feedback back back to the WebXR people, unless anyone else sees other issues worth mentioning missing.

ACTION: Travis to clean-up and follow-up on this.

Travis: We've met them several times, did a thorough review. Not apparent what the next steps are, but followup from a comment on 31st. this AM I filed these points on their issue list. Should we close it and ask them to come back at a later stage?

Dan: I'd like to close it

Alex: I'd like us to invest more time on this. Specifically, I'm concenred they'll ship something that hasn't progressed enough. The changes we requested were large.

Dan: Should we invite them to a call? if so then we need to have an agenda for that discussion.

Alex: Just an update on our previous conversations.

Dan: Travis, can you invite them to our 8 May call?

Travis: sure

• Offscreen Canvas - Travis, David, Alex, Sangwhan
• With Credentials - David

Followup:

• [Deprecating nonsecure cookie delivery](https://github.com/w3ctag/design-reviews/issues/239

Dan: In going though existing issues I noticed that a lot needs to be cleaned up. Because of the launch of the Immersive Web group, I was looking at our review of Web VR and I noticed that it was set to a milestone of May 29th and it is still open! So I didnt have the time to see if there are otehrs like this - but there probably are. Maybe worthwhile doing this the next couple of minutes... like can be close this one out?

Dan: Is there anyting left on this issue or can we close it?

Travis: Looking over the comments. Discussion around commit model, Web VR in worker.

Alex: This is what we discussed a lot - having both commit (pump data) and rAF (async model) is weird, very different models.

Hadley: Gamepad API, did we understand the differnence between the specs?

Ale: x: People hoped for Gampad to be the answer, but didn't turn out the way, added more and more info like pose, etc so added that directly to Web XR

Hadley: Makes sense. I posrpose that we keep this in our backlog

Alex: Should we talk to them at TPAC?

Dan: I think that is a good idea if we can get closure around raf and gampad

Hadley: I would like to talk at TPAC

Dan: I will attend part of their meeting at TPAC

Dan: I will assign to TPAC -then we can hopefully close it up