- From: Tim Dresser <tdresser@google.com>
- Date: Thu, 18 Jun 2015 12:17:55 +0000
- To: "Patrick H. Lauke" <redux@splintered.co.uk>, public-pointer-events@w3.org
- Message-ID: <CAHTsfZC+pRnmf9D0vv3hUnFmJAWbn018q43dyb7Bhd6J8eaMww@mail.gmail.com>
I suspect we'll want the spec to phrase this as optional, as there's likely hardware which won't support this feature. What's the advantage of adding a pointerbuttonchange event instead of dispatching pointermove events? Would this just be an improvement in developer ergonomics? On Wed, Jun 17, 2015 at 6:56 PM Patrick H. Lauke <redux@splintered.co.uk> wrote: > On 17/06/2015 23:19, Jacob Rossi wrote: > > On Tue, Jun 16, 2015 at 10:26 AM, Tim Dresser <tdresser@google.com> > wrote: > > >> I'd be fine with forcing developers to listen for > pointerup/pointerdown events to keep track of hover. > > > > Yeah I agree. This seems like the safest place to start. I opened up an > issue to track this and will take a look at a spec patch to address this. > > Just to confirm my suspicion that a hovered stylus does, predictably, > have a pressure of 0...so getting a pointermove event with zero pressure > it's a fair bet that it's a hovered (at very very gently brushing > against the screen) movement, for instance. As such we're probably right > not to magic up a new touching/not touching attribute. > > P > -- > Patrick H. Lauke > > www.splintered.co.uk | https://github.com/patrickhlauke > http://flickr.com/photos/redux/ | http://redux.deviantart.com > twitter: @patrick_h_lauke | skype: patrick_h_lauke >
Received on Thursday, 18 June 2015 12:18:39 UTC