W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webevents@w3.org > January to March 2013

Re: [Touch events] identifiedTouch (was: createTouchList should probably take a sequence, not an IDL array)

From: Sangwhan Moon <smoon@opera.com>
Date: Tue, 08 Jan 2013 15:46:16 +0900
Message-ID: <50EBC0B8.4080405@opera.com>
To: Arthur Barstow <art.barstow@nokia.com>
CC: public-webevents@w3.org
On 1/5/13 10:31 PM, Arthur Barstow wrote:
> On 1/4/13 3:21 PM, ext Rick Byers wrote:
>> On Fri, Jan 4, 2013 at 2:19 PM, <Cathy.Chan@nokia.com
>> <mailto:Cathy.Chan@nokia.com>> wrote:
>>     Along a somewhat similar vein (of v1 goal being documenting existing
>>     implementations), how do we plan to resolve the issue with
>>     TouchList.identifiedTouch()? As a reminder, the identifiedTouch()
>>     method is
>>     implemented in Firefox and Opera but not in WebKit. Should we, for
>>     example,
>>     consider making the method optional?
>> Also as another reminder: I agreed to implement this is WebKit, but we
>> realized this would have no effect on iOS (since their touch support
>> is in a private fork, as far as I can tell) so it's not sufficient to
>> satisfy our goal of the spec defining interoperability.  Perhaps we
>> should just remove it from v1 (and leave it in TEv2) if we're changing
>> the spec anyway?
> Making features "optional" creates other problems (e.g. interop). As
> such, I tend to agree with Rick that removing identifiedTouch() from v1
> is a reasonable solution. However, I would like to hear from others, at
> least:
> * Gecko/Mozilla; Matt, Olli,  Boris?
> * Opera: Sangwhan?

Making it optional has it's risks, but I would consider making it
optional since it is a simple helper method a possibility. The method
is implementable using scripts after all, but for implementations that
have a native version developers can use that.

I'm not sure how many will agree with this though.

Received on Tuesday, 8 January 2013 06:46:58 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:09:34 UTC