W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-svg@w3.org > August 2010

Re: Should event and accessKey timing respect preventDefault?

From: Rick <graham.rick@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 27 Aug 2010 18:27:58 -0400
Message-ID: <AANLkTi=qun0FZ025HQLmm4_BvspaSdOAL8_4CfQRqAnK@mail.gmail.com>
To: cogit@ludicrum.org
Cc: Jack Jansen <Jack.Jansen@cwi.nl>, www-smil-request@w3.org, Brian Birtles <birtles@gmail.com>, www-smil@w3.org, www-svg <www-svg@w3.org>
I'll inject use cases, hopefully for clarity.

If you intercept an F5 and you don''t want the browser to perform a refresh,
you call preventDefault()

If you intercept a right click and you don't want the browser to pop up a
menu, perhaps you want to do it yourself, you call preventDefault()

I haven't worked with SMIL since I was on the group, I hope to change that
soon.  That experience is too foggy for me to give a useful comment.  I hope
the use cases help.

On Fri, Aug 27, 2010 at 11:59 AM, <cogit@ludicrum.org> wrote:

> I think I agree with Jack. IIRC, the behavior Brian describes might be
> appropriate after a cancelPropagate() call, but not after preventDefault().
> Apologies if I have the method names wrong - am citing from memory.
>
> Patrick
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jack Jansen <Jack.Jansen@cwi.nl>
> Sender: www-smil-request@w3.org
> Date: Fri, 27 Aug 2010 09:43:24
> To: Brian Birtles<birtles@gmail.com>
> Cc: <www-smil@w3.org>; www-svg<www-svg@w3.org>
> Subject: Re: Should event and accessKey timing respect preventDefault?
>
>
> On 27 aug 2010, at 04:37, Brian Birtles wrote:
>
> > (Cross-posting to www-smil and www-svg since although this is a SMIL
> > issue it is probably recently of more concern to SVG implementers and
> > authors.)
> >
> > Dear all,
> >
> > SMIL as incorporated in SVG allows for animations to be keyed off
> > various DOM events such as mouse clicks (event timing) as well as
> > keyboard inputs (accessKey timing).
> >
> > One area that would benefit from clarification is whether animations
> > should be triggered when preventDefault is called on the event in
> > question (and presuming that event is cancelable).
>
>
> I haven't looked closely at preventDefault (up until 2 minutes ago:-), but
> my impression is that it it should the opposite from what you suggest.
> You seem to suggest
>    someone calls event->preventDefault(), therefore the default action for
> the event on its target node doesn't happen.
>
> My understanding is
>  if the event comes in, and the target node decides not to take the default
> action for some reason, then it should also call event->preventDefault().
>
> If my understanding is correct then I think there is no issue. Otherwise,
> could you point me to some references?
> --
> Jack Jansen, <Jack.Jansen@cwi.nl>, http://www.cwi.nl/~jack<http://www.cwi.nl/%7Ejack>
> If I can't dance I don't want to be part of your revolution -- Emma Goldman
>
>
>
>
>


-- 
Cheers!
Rick
Received on Friday, 27 August 2010 22:28:34 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Friday, 8 March 2013 15:54:45 GMT