- From: Patrick H. Lauke via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 16 Nov 2016 12:49:32 +0000
- To: public-css-archive@w3.org
> I do not understand how it is useful to the author to have a as the sole information about input capabilities a list of input capabilities that includes those that are known to the UA to be either something that the user doesn't use at all, or something that the user uses occasionally but typically not. Let's leave our fundamental disagreement here by the wayside...it's clear that we won't be able to resolve this (but I will still stress that the desire may well be that UAs are very smart about being able to say what user uses with what frequency, but currently the reality is that they aren't...e.g. on a laptop with touchscreen, even if the user is heavily making use of touchscreen where possible, they'll report the mouse/trackpad as being primary; sure, OS/UA *could* be cleverer and notice "oh, 51% of interactions in this session came from touchscreen, so maybe i should report THAT as the primary", but they don't). Instead, let's look at the PR I submitted (which does not try to drop the concept of "primary", but tries to offer a more holistic advice that authors *may* wish to use a combination of `pointer`/`hover`/`any-pointer`/`any-hover` to design for all possible inputs, or they *may* wish not to...but the point is, it's something for the author to decide, and my PR tries to point out why they may wish to do one or the other). Let's leave this issue here as is for now, but as said if at least some of what I propose in the PR can be rolled into the spec, I can live with the rest of what's in the spec regarding primary etc. [edit: I just pushed a further commit to the PR https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/pull/715 to soften some of my language, making it clearer that it's optional/a "may" for authors...but ultimately, that decision needs to rest with authors in any case] -- GitHub Notification of comment by patrickhlauke Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/690#issuecomment-260938328 using your GitHub account
Received on Wednesday, 16 November 2016 12:49:39 UTC