RE: Add 'manipulation' touch-action property?

The MSDN docs certainly don’t match our implementation (we’ll fix that).  The spec’s current grammar does match our implementation.

I agree it’s a tad quirky that “manipulation pan-x” works but “pan-x pan-x” doesn’t (seeing as manipulation is essentially shorthand for “pan-x pan-y other-goo”. “auto” / “none” are typically never combinable with other values in any property though.

While it is probably sub-optimal, It passes the “I can live with it” test for me too.


From: Rick Byers []
Sent: Thursday, March 6, 2014 12:19 PM
To: Nikolay Lebedev
Cc: Matt Brubeck; Jacob Rossi; Patrick H. Lauke;
Subject: Re: Add 'manipulation' touch-action property?

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 <<>> wrote:
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 ?


On Wed, Mar 5, 2014 at 11:32 PM, Matt Brubeck <<>> wrote:
I filed a bug to implement 'manipulation' in Gecko:

Received on Friday, 7 March 2014 22:31:34 UTC