- From: Garrett Smith <dhtmlkitchen@gmail.com>
- Date: Wed, 20 Oct 2010 18:13:41 -0700
- To: "T.V Raman" <raman@google.com>
- Cc: Steven.Pemberton@cwi.nl, www-dom@w3.org, public-forms@w3.org, public-xhtml2@w3.org
On 10/20/10, T.V Raman <raman@google.com> wrote: > [opinions on ISSUE-170] (see also: http://www.w3.org/2008/webapps/track/issues/170) > DOMActivate is interaction agnostic Where does "click" fails to notify the program of a UI activation-type event? Do activation events belongs in D3E or should they be defined by a separate specification? Activation events aren't interoperable. They can't easily be feature tested to know where they're supported. Author's can't make unrelated execution inferences about them (just assume they works) because the majority of clients don't support them; the app would never get past QA testing (because it would not work in IE and other browsers). Pages don't rely on them leaving browser vendors not much incentive for implementing them. Feature testing was reraised in issue #123, though the issue was discussed previously. Time and effort spent on spec'ing activation events took away from issue #1. Now issue #1 is about finishing D3E and it seems that the scope of the spec is too large to just get the entire thing done (the current spec takes 1-2 trees to print ;-)) And so issues #148, issue #86 are about modularizing D3E, though to be fair, that came up over a year ago on list via Sergey Ilinsky (that seemed to have been ignored), was re-raised by Ian Hickson (issue #86). The spec scope seems to be causing it to take too long. Perhaps activation events are a good thing and if so, then do they belong in D3E or a separate document? If the reason nobody uses activation events is that they can't be detected, then detecting events should be looked into. That was raised in issue #123, and also mentioned in Doug's "Can Dispatch canDispatch()?" thread. To me, that seems to belong more in D3E because it is very generalized concept of "detect if object has a predefined 'slot' for such event type being dispatched. Garrett
Received on Thursday, 21 October 2010 01:14:28 UTC