W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-css-archive@w3.org > March 2017

Re: [csswg-drafts] [cssom-view] New feature - scroll-boundary-behavior (an extension of -ms-scroll-chaining)

From: Benoit Girard via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
Date: Fri, 24 Mar 2017 00:07:54 +0000
To: public-css-archive@w3.org
Message-ID: <issue_comment.created-288897100-1490314073-sysbot+gh@w3.org>
There's a related proposal with a confusingly similar name 'overscroll-action':
https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/forum/#!msg/blink-dev/Uzit4zDQ1ps/pD_3k2rqBAAJ

overscroll-action applies to the gesture on the viewport for history navigation (2 finger swipe back on Mac) and pull-to-refresh.

I find the nomenclature a bit confusing because 'overscroll-action: auto' would suggest that the element would behave as if it had 'scroll-boundary-behavior: propagate' which is orthogonal.  

1. Should the two proposal be considered orthogonal? If so it allows over-scroll animations (glow/bounce) to be toggled independently from navigation gestures.
2. If we consider the specifications to be orthogonal can we come up with better nomenclature? I would suggest that 'navigation-action' would be better name 'overscroll-action'.
3. Right now it's not possible to propagate scrolling while disabling the overscroll animation. If this is something that's important perhaps a better proposal to cover the 4 logical states could be:
`overscroll-action: [auto || [ [propagate || contain] | [overscroll || no-overscroll] ]`
4. Does 'overscroll-action-x: contain' behave as if 'overscroll-action: no-navigation-x' was set? From an implementation point of view I believe 'overscroll-action-x: contain' should behave as if the script was performing preventDefault on any overscroll and thus disallow events from reaching the viewport and thus would implicitly disallow overscroll (navigation) actions.

-- 
GitHub Notification of comment by bgirard
Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/769#issuecomment-288897100 using your GitHub account
Received on Friday, 24 March 2017 00:08:00 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Tuesday, 19 October 2021 01:30:30 UTC