W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webapps@w3.org > October to December 2012

Re: [pointerlock] Is Pointer Lock feature complete i.e. LC ready? [Was: Re: [admin] Publishing specs before TPAC: CfC start deadline is Oct 15]

From: Florian Bösch <pyalot@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 2 Oct 2012 23:59:01 +0200
Message-ID: <CAOK8ODjejZS8RVja-EvpKw9=gCkj+odFAquOOLKvC8jrgNPgRw@mail.gmail.com>
To: olli@pettay.fi
Cc: Chris Pearce <cpearce@mozilla.com>, Vincent Scheib <scheib@google.com>, Arthur Barstow <art.barstow@nokia.com>, "public-webapps@w3c.org" <public-webapps@w3c.org>
On Tue, Oct 2, 2012 at 11:52 PM, Olli Pettay <Olli.Pettay@helsinki.fi>wrote:

> On 10/02/2012 11:55 PM, Florian Bösch wrote:
>> I'd like to point out that vendors are using additional failure criteria
>> to determine if pointerlock succeeds that are not outlined in the
>> specification. Firefox uses the fullscreen change event to determine
>> failure and chrome requires the pointer lock request to fail if not
>> resulting
>> from a user interaction target. I think that Firefoxes interpretation is
>> less useful than Chromes,
> But safer

Also not in conformance to the specification (hence a bug). Additionally,
it will make it really difficult to follow the specification since
non-fullscreen mouse capture is specifically intended by the specification
by not adding that failure mode *to* the specification (there's a fairly
long discussion on this on the chrome ticket for pointerlock resulting in
what Chrome does now).

 and that Chromes interpretation should be amended
>> to the spec since it seems like a fairly good idea.
>>  I'm not yet convinced that it is safe enough.
> Also, it is not properly defined anywhere.
So either Chrome is also implementing in conformance to the specification,
or the specification is changed. Ipso facto, the specification is not
complete since I don't think Chrome will drop this failure mode, and it
seems like Firefox is intending to follow Chromes lead because otherwise it
wouldn't be possible to implement non-fullscreen pointerlock.
Received on Tuesday, 2 October 2012 21:59:29 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Friday, 27 October 2017 07:26:49 UTC