W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-dom@w3.org > July to September 2010

Re: ISSUE-122 (add mousewheel): Consider adding 'mousewheel' again [DOM3 Events]

From: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>
Date: Thu, 16 Sep 2010 09:32:30 +0200
To: "Olli Pettay" <Olli.Pettay@helsinki.fi>, Olli@pettay.fi
Cc: www-dom@w3.org
Message-ID: <op.vi368ffm64w2qv@anne-van-kesterens-macbook-pro.local>
On Wed, 15 Sep 2010 21:35:13 +0200, Olli Pettay <Olli.Pettay@helsinki.fi>  
wrote:
> On 09/10/2010 02:17 PM, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
>> On Fri, 10 Sep 2010 13:09:38 +0200, Web Applications Working Group Issue
>> Tracker <sysbot+tracker@w3.org> wrote:
>>> 'mousewheel' was later dropped based on feedback from implementers
>>> (Mozilla, Microsoft), who expressed a reluctance to implement
>>> 'mousewheel', and a lack of useful interoperability and concern that
>>> any change to improve interop would likely break a number of sites.
>>>
>>> However, the group may wish to consider adding it again, see:
>>> * http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-dom/2010JulSep/0103.html
>>
>> Are you saying Internet Explorer no longer supports the mousewheel
>> event?
>
> That is not the point.
> The point is that mousewheel doesn't capture all the things needed in
> today's wheel events. So better to have something which hopefully
> is closer to what is needed.

To me that is the point:

http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-dom/2010JulSep/0159.html


>> The reason Opera / Chrome / Safari support the event is because
>> Internet Explorer has it too and is needed for compatibility.
>
> Yet they don't work the same way, IIRC

Lots of features do not work the same way. That does not mean we can just  
remove them. It means the differences do not matter for the common cases.


-- 
Anne van Kesteren
http://annevankesteren.nl/
Received on Thursday, 16 September 2010 07:33:11 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 22 June 2012 06:14:05 GMT