Re: maxTouchPoints on platforms that have less granular information

Looks great, thanks Jacob!


On Wed, Nov 13, 2013 at 2:31 PM, Jacob Rossi <Jacob.Rossi@microsoft.com>wrote:

> These changes are now reflected in today's Editor's Draft [1]. Please let
> me know if you have any concerns with the changes. Thanks.
>
> -Jacob
>
> [1]
> https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/pointerevents/raw-file/bd674b11481a/pointerEvents.html
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Arthur Barstow [mailto:art.barstow@nokia.com]
> Sent: Sunday, November 3, 2013 9:57 AM
> To: public-pointer-events@w3.org
> Subject: Re: maxTouchPoints on platforms that have less granular
> information
>
> Re this comment and the CR comment tracking doc, I set the Resolution to
> "add non-normative note"
> <http://www.w3.org/wiki/PointerEvents/CR-pointerevents-20130509>.
>
> On 10/31/13 3:00 PM, ext Scott González wrote:
> > That looks good to me as well.
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Oct 31, 2013 at 2:46 PM, Rick Byers <rbyers@google.com
> > <mailto:rbyers@google.com>> wrote:
> >
> >     That sounds perfect, thanks Jacob!
> >
> >
> >     On Thu, Oct 31, 2013 at 2:29 PM, Jacob Rossi
> >     <Jacob.Rossi@microsoft.com <mailto:Jacob.Rossi@microsoft.com>>
> wrote:
> >
> >         Given a platform that has less granular information than
> >         required, I think your approach (minimum guaranteed) is the
> >         best.  I'm OK with adding a note. But a non-normative note
> >         cannot use RFC2119 keywords, like "should." [1]  Here's an
> >         alternative:
> >
> >         "Note: maxTouchPoints is often used to ensure that the
> >         interaction model of the content can be recognized by the
> >         current hardware. UI affordances can be provided to users with
> >         less capable hardware. On platforms where the precise number
> >         of touch points is not known, the minimum number guaranteed to
> >         be recognized is provided. Therefore, it is possible for the
> >         number of recognized touch points to exceed the value of
> >         maxTouchPoints."
> >
> >         -Jacob
> >
> >         [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/pointerevents/#conformance
> >
> >         On Thu, Oct 10, 2013 at 3:36 PM, Rick Byers <rbyers@google.com
> >         <mailto:rbyers@google.com>> wrote:
> >         I just learned that Android doesn't have an API to report the
> >         exact number of touch points supported.  Instead it has a few
> >         levels (1, 2+, 5+).  See
> >
> http://developer.android.com/reference/android/content/pm/PackageManager.html#FEATURE_TOUCHSCREEN
> .
> >
> >         Should we consider adding a non-normative note or something
> >         suggesting how such platforms should implement this API?  Eg:
> >
> >         Note: some platforms may not report the precise number of
> >         touch points available.  On such platforms, this API should
> >         return the minimum guaranteed number of points that an
> >         application can rely on being available.  For example, on
> >         Android systems
> >         reporting FEATURE_TOUCHSCREEN_MULTITOUCH_DISTINCT (but not
> >         FEATURE_TOUCHSCREEN_MULTITOUCH_JAZZHAND) this should return 2.
> >
> >         I.e. this API should be used to control the addition of
> >         additional UI to compensate for the lack of sufficient touch
> >         points (such as showing zoom controls on a single-finger
> >         device), not as a limit on the number of touch points that
> >         should actually be handled by the application.
> >
> >         Sorry I wasn't aware of this as a potential issue sooner.
> >
> >         Rick
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>