Re: Should mouse events be triggered on ancestors of disabled elements?

On 8 January 2016 at 20:33, Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@mit.edu> wrote:

> On 1/8/16 1:07 PM, Sebastian Zartner wrote:
>
>> No, it's the same as you implemented in https://bugzil.la/218093. There
>> the mouse movement and pointer events are also dispatched on the
>> disabled element with it as target, right?
>>
>
> Yes, but they fire the relevant listeners on that element too!  That was
> the whole point: people wanted to get mouse movement events even for the
> disabled elements.
>
> It sounds like you're suggesting a model where the event will fire, and
> build the event propagation chain more or less as normal, but either
> exclude the disabled element from the chain or skip firing listeners on it
> or something.  The question is what the exact proposed behavior is. And it
> would certainly be a change to the guts of core DOM event dispatch.
>

I am not suggesting anything. I just want the spec. to be clear about what
the correct behavior is[1] and that is all what this thread is about.

I guess that's also what the other browsers do.
>>
>
> That's not consistent with what your previous mail said...
>
> Taking a JSFiddle[1] for testing I got the following results.
>>
>
> Thanks.  That helps a lot.  Definitely looks like Chrome and IE11 have
> some different event dispatch model.  Edge, on the other hand, is pretty
> close to where Firefox was until my recent changes...
>

So, coming back to the initial point, just asking differently: Which
browser currently implements the correct behavior according to the spec.?
Firefox, which is always firing mouse movement/pointer events?
Chrome/Opera, only firing the events when the listener is set on the
ancestor? IE, always firing all the events? Edge, which is never firing any
events? Or none of them?

Sebastian

[1] Asking in regard of your statement in https://bugzil.la/1220048#c1,
Boris. And since you also think that the spec. should be clearer, I
actually expected comments from other people than you. :-)