W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-pointer-events@w3.org > April to June 2013

Re: Last Call comments

From: Scott González <scott.gonzalez@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 11 Apr 2013 13:11:16 -0400
Message-ID: <CAO8i3idPERGzVH7JUwesH05-ABrH-ndDPwfMaG8gwdOo83Nneg@mail.gmail.com>
To: Matt Brubeck <mbrubeck@mozilla.com>
Cc: Konstantinov Sergey <twirl@yandex-team.ru>, Sangwhan Moon <sangwhan@iki.fi>, "public-pointer-events@w3.org" <public-pointer-events@w3.org>
On Thu, Apr 11, 2013 at 12:33 PM, Matt Brubeck <mbrubeck@mozilla.com> wrote:

> I haven't seen any justification for the pointerID == 1 requirement for
> mouse input.  I agree with Konstantinov that it seems to serve no purpose,
> and I agree with Sangwhan that it provides a redundant and less-clear way
> to handle an already-covered use case.  I'm also worried it encourages a
> misconception that other pointerIDs might have meaning other than as opaque
> identifiers.
>
> Are there any objections to removing this sentence from section 3.1?
>
> "If the device producing the event is a mouse, then the pointerId *must*be 1. Device types other than mouse
> *must not* have a pointerId of 1."
>
>  I have no objection. I believe there were others who didn't object the
last time this was discussed, but I don't think there's a record of who was
included in that group.
Received on Thursday, 11 April 2013 17:11:43 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:20:25 UTC