- From: Arthur Barstow <art.barstow@gmail.com>
- Date: Tue, 17 Jun 2014 08:24:02 -0400
- To: Scott González <scott.gonzalez@gmail.com>, Pointer Events Working Group <public-pointer-events@w3.org>
On 6/13/14 9:17 PM, Scott González wrote: > I believe the following is the full list of assertions from the TTWF > event that haven't been already implemented in web-platform-tests. > > TA 3.1, 3.2 - pointerup properties matching pointerdown properties > https://github.com/dmethvin/pointerevents-test/blob/6d1a680451dcacb23ccfeb907c024a124ab3a8ec/pointerup.html#L133 > We do have the equivalent tests for pointermove (5.1, 5.2) > in pointerevent_pointermove_isprimary_same_as_pointerdown.html What's the plan/recommendation? Are you or Dave going to resubmit the test file or update one of the merged files? > TA 12.1 - constructor assertions > https://github.com/dmethvin/pointerevents-test/blob/master/constructor.html What's the plan here? Do we need someone to review this? > There are more extensive pointerleave tests with deeply nested > elements, but I'm not sure if this is necessary: > https://github.com/dmethvin/pointerevents-test/blob/master/pointerenterleave-continuous.html Perhaps one option for tests like these is to tag them with something like `stress test` and thus distinguish it as something that isn't strictly need to "test the Candidate Recommendation". WDYT? > gotpointercapture and lostpointercapture events should be fired > asynchronously. There is no Test Assertion for this, but this is > covered by https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=24971 > gotpointercapture: > https://github.com/dmethvin/pointerevents-test/blob/6d1a680451dcacb23ccfeb907c024a124ab3a8ec/pointercaptureevents.html#L106 > lostpointercapture: > https://github.com/dmethvin/pointerevents-test/blob/6d1a680451dcacb23ccfeb907c024a124ab3a8ec/pointercaptureevents.html#L129 So it sounds like we need someone to review this and when all issues are resolved to merge it? -Thanks, Art
Received on Tuesday, 17 June 2014 12:24:31 UTC