- From: Rick Byers <rbyers@google.com>
- Date: Thu, 31 Oct 2013 14:56:12 -0400
- To: Jacob Rossi <Jacob.Rossi@microsoft.com>
- Cc: "Cathy.Chan@nokia.com" <Cathy.Chan@nokia.com>, "scott.gonzalez@gmail.com" <scott.gonzalez@gmail.com>, "public-pointer-events@w3.org" <public-pointer-events@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <CAFUtAY9T1TmRDbOPxKSTNaLUVBdx8fR-ayy=cU6vPY6xZOSSVg@mail.gmail.com>
On Thu, Oct 31, 2013 at 2:51 PM, Jacob Rossi <Jacob.Rossi@microsoft.com>wrote: > I'm ok with a note as well. Here's suggested text to be placed in section > 10: > > "Note: when pointer capture is set, pointerover, pointerout, pointerenter, > and pointerleave events are only generated for the element that has capture > as other elements can no longer by targeted by the pointer. " > Good, but a little ambiguous as to the precise behavior I think. How about replace "for the element that has capture" with "when crossing the boundary of the element that has capture" - just to make it crystal clear that they're not generated "for" the capture element when crossing over other elements. > > -----Original Message----- > From: Cathy.Chan@nokia.com [mailto:Cathy.Chan@nokia.com] > Sent: Thursday, October 31, 2013 11:39 AM > To: rbyers@google.com; Jacob Rossi > Cc: scott.gonzalez@gmail.com; public-pointer-events@w3.org > Subject: RE: Impact of pointer capture on pointerover/pointerout events > > > From: ext Rick Byers [mailto:rbyers@google.com] > > > > This makes sense, thank you. Do you think it's worth adding a note to > > this effect - the reasoning is a little subtle (but the behavior is > > intuitive so maybe it's not necessary). > > > +1 for an informative note. > - Cathy. > > > Sounds like we just need to add a 'not' to the description in the test > > ( > > https://github.com/InternetExplorer/web-platform-tests/blob/ddffbdc5ed > > d63c972b9ee42df1f161fc17778125/pointerevents/capture.html#L16), > > and ideally expand the test to validate this. > > > > Rick > > > > > > On Thu, Oct 31, 2013 at 1:47 PM, Jacob Rossi <Jacob.Rossi@microsoft.com > >wrote: > > > > > Pointer capture makes it so that pointer events cannot hit test to > > > any other element but the one with capture. It follows, then, that a > > > move can only be detected to have entered or left the hit test > > > bounds of the element with capture ("A user agent MUST dispatch this > > > event when a pointing device is moved into the hit test boundaries of > an element." [1]). > > > > > > So, pointerover/pointerout only fire for entering/leaving the > > > element with capture but do not fire for entering/leaving other > > > elements. This is what occurs in the test case where pointerover is > > > dispatched to the element > > > (#target0) that has capture. > > > > > > -Jacob > > > > > > > > > On Wed, Oct 30, 2013 at 2:43 PM, <Cathy.Chan@nokia.com> wrote: > > > > > > I don't have anything to add (yet) except a link to the original > thread: > > > > > > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-pointer-events/2013AprJun > > > /0120.html > > > > > > - Cathy. > > > > > > > From: ext Rick Byers [mailto:rbyers@google.com] > Sent: Tuesday, > > > October 29, 2013 10:43 PM > To: Scott González; Jacob Rossi > Cc: > > > public-pointer-events@w3.org > Subject: Re: Impact of pointer > > > capture on pointerover/pointerout events > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Reviving this old thread - I don't think we ever talked about it > > > on a call > (I was away for the following call and it looks like we > > > never re-scheduled > discussing of it). > > > > > > > > The Microsoft test submission says it expects to receive a > > > pointerover > event in exactly this scenario ( > > > > https://github.com/InternetExplorer/web-platform-tests/blob/ddffbdc5 > > > edd63c972b9ee42df1f161fc17778125/pointerevents/capture.html#L16 > > > ), > > > > but it's not actually validating that it happens and IE11 appears > > > not to do > it. > > > > > > > > I think we need some clarity on what the spec intends here. Is > > > IE11's > behavior correct? > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > Rick > > > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Apr 29, 2013 at 12:08 PM, Scott González < > > > scott.gonzalez@gmail.com>wrote: > > > > > > > >> On Fri, Apr 26, 2013 at 4:32 PM, Rick Byers <rbyers@google.com> > wrote: > > > >> > > > >>> Should we explicitly specify that? > > > >>> > > > >> > > > >> I wouldn't expect any over/out events during capture. > > > >> > > > >> Also should we explicitly specify the meaning of relatedTarget > > > for the >>> pointer events analogous to the mouse events? > > > >>> > > > >> > > > >> This seems like a good idea. > > > >> > > > > >
Received on Thursday, 31 October 2013 18:57:00 UTC