W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-pointer-events@w3.org > January to March 2014

Re: Add 'manipulation' touch-action property?

From: Rick Byers <rbyers@google.com>
Date: Thu, 6 Mar 2014 15:19:16 -0500
Message-ID: <CAFUtAY8RTRY_Vr4gSL=n7Bf8t8L-0S83mHRsnS5tcVfy933GUA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Nikolay Lebedev <nicklebedev37@gmail.com>
Cc: Matt Brubeck <mbrubeck@mozilla.com>, Jacob Rossi <Jacob.Rossi@microsoft.com>, "Patrick H. Lauke" <redux@splintered.co.uk>, "public-pointer-events@w3.org" <public-pointer-events@w3.org>
I just checked IE11, and (despite what the MSDN docs grammer says) it does
treat 'touch-action: manipulation pan-x' as valid.  So the grammar as
written in the spec seems to match IE.

This is surprising to me.  We don't allow 'auto pan-x' (since pan-x is
redundant with auto) or 'pan-x pan-x', why would we allow 'manipulation
pan-x'?  That said I think this is very minor.  If IE is already behaving
this way, then perhaps sites are depending on it.  Although it seems
slightly sub-optimal I'm OK using that grammar (although we'll need to
change blink to match).

Jacob, can you comment on this please?  Is this just an error in the MSDN
docs?



On Thu, Mar 6, 2014 at 12:48 PM, Nikolay Lebedev <nicklebedev37@gmail.com>wrote:

> Hello,
>
> could you let me know - is there spec bug filed regarding changing
> touch-action grammar from the "auto | none | [pan-x || pan-y ||
> manipulation]" to "auto | none | [pan-x || pan-y ] | manipulation" ?
>
> Or it is still under discussion which form is correct ?
>
> Thanks,
> Nick
>
>
> On Wed, Mar 5, 2014 at 11:32 PM, Matt Brubeck <mbrubeck@mozilla.com>wrote:
>
>> I filed a bug to implement 'manipulation' in Gecko:
>> https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=979345
>>
>>
>
Received on Thursday, 6 March 2014 20:20:04 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:20:26 UTC