- From: Rick Byers via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Fri, 29 Jul 2016 17:28:54 +0000
- To: public-pointer-events@w3.org
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 https://github.com/w3c/pointerevents/issues/121#issuecomment-236241999 using your GitHub account
Received on Friday, 29 July 2016 17:29:02 UTC