W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-pointer-events@w3.org > October to December 2012

RE: Make mouseenter/mouseleave behavior optional

From: Jacob Rossi <Jacob.Rossi@microsoft.com>
Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2012 03:14:58 +0000
To: Scott González <scott.gonzalez@gmail.com>, Arthur Barstow <art.barstow@nokia.com>
CC: Rick Byers <rbyers@google.com>, "olli@pettay.fi" <olli@pettay.fi>, "public-pointer-events@w3.org" <public-pointer-events@w3.org>
Message-ID: <D0BC8E77E79D9846B61A2432D1BA4EAE13899F3C@TK5EX14MBXC287.redmond.corp.microsoft.com>
There seemed to be consensus that we should make this change during last week's call.  Based on the "edit first, revise later" model [1], I have gone ahead and made the change to mark the section on mouse compatibility events as optional. [2] Please let me know if you have any concerns with this change.

-Jacob

[1] http://www.w3.org/wiki/PointerEvents/WGCode#Editing_Policy
[2] https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=20110


From: Scott González [mailto:scott.gonzalez@gmail.com]
Sent: Monday, November 26, 2012 8:20 AM
To: Jacob Rossi
Cc: Rick Byers; olli@pettay.fi; public-pointer-events@w3.org
Subject: Re: Make mouseenter/mouseleave behavior optional

On Tue, Nov 20, 2012 at 6:57 PM, Jacob Rossi <Jacob.Rossi@microsoft.com<mailto:Jacob.Rossi@microsoft.com>> wrote:
I agree that mouseenter/mouseleave should not be required if a UA doesn't implement them. In fact, neither should mousedown/mouseup/mousemove/mouseover/mouseout. I consider the section on mouse events purely for compat with legacy content. You could imagine a UA that doesn't have legacy content to deal with and just wants to implement pointer. Once we have an issue tracker, we should add this.

Yes, in my mind, the future will be pointer only. Even if UAs still implement mouse for legacy content, authors should never write new code using mouse and they should never use the APIs for controlling whether pointer events are promoted to mouse events. If the entire mouse-related API could be in its own section and not required, that would be ideal.
Received on Tuesday, 4 December 2012 03:15:37 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:20:24 UTC