Re: [pointerevents] Add Element.hasPointerCapture API

The use case is certainly week - we're not sure this is high value, 
but we thought it might help reduce the risk of having implicit 
capture for some pointers and not others, and was simple and straight 
forward enough that there seemed little harm.

But let me try to explain the case I came up with a little better.  
Yes such a library would have `pointermove` handlers on the document 
where they'd want to do their own hit-testing.  But in the uncaptured 
case, that extra hit-test would be redundant and unfortunate.  It 
would be nice if the library could do the hit-test only in the case 
where it knew the `target` didn't represent a hit-test.

GitHub Notification of comment by RByers
Please view or discuss this issue at
 using your GitHub account

Received on Friday, 29 July 2016 17:29:02 UTC