RE: Impact of pointer capture on pointerover/pointerout events

Works for me, as long as you
s/by targeted by/be targeted by/

- Cathy.


> -----Original Message-----
> From: ext Jacob Rossi [mailto:Jacob.Rossi@microsoft.com]
> Sent: Thursday, October 31, 2013 3:49 PM
> To: Chan Cathy (Nokia-CIC/Boston); rbyers@google.com
> Cc: scott.gonzalez@gmail.com; public-pointer-events@w3.org
> Subject: RE: Impact of pointer capture on pointerover/pointerout events
> 
> "Note: when pointer capture is set, pointerover, pointerout, pointerenter,
> and pointerleave events are only generated when crossing the boundary of
> the element that has capture as other elements can no longer by targeted by
> the pointer. This has the effect of suppressing these events on all other
> elements."
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Cathy.Chan@nokia.com [mailto:Cathy.Chan@nokia.com]
> Sent: Thursday, October 31, 2013 12:20 PM
> 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
> 
> Correct me if I'm wrong. The way I see it (which was not immediately obvious
> from the prose), pointer capture effectively redirects all pointerup,
> pointermove and pointercancel(?) events of the pointer to the element that
> has capture, while suppressing the pointerover, pointerout, pointerenter
> and pointerleave events of that pointer on all other elements. Maybe that's
> what should go into the note?
> - Cathy.
> 
> > From: ext Rick Byers [mailto:rbyers@google.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/ddffbd
> > > > c5ed
> > > > 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/2013Ap
> > > > > rJun
> > > > > /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/ddff
> > > > > bdc5
> > > > >
> 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 20:50:22 UTC