Re: [PointerLock] Should there be onpointerlockchange/onpointerlockerror properties defined in the spec

On Wed, May 1, 2013 at 7:00 AM, Anne van Kesteren <annevk@annevk.nl> wrote:

> On Thu, Apr 11, 2013 at 5:59 PM, Vincent Scheib <scheib@google.com> wrote:
> > I argue on that issue that we should not bubble the event and have the
> > handler on document only. Pointer lock doesn't have as much legacy spec
> > churn as fullscreen, but I think we're in a position to have both of
> them be
> > cleaned up before un-prefixing.
>
> Okay. Lets kill the bubbling and define the event handlers inline.
> Sorry for the delay.
>

Thanks, sounds good to me. I see and agree with your changes listed here
[1].

I have modified the pointer lock spec to not bubble the events.


> Fullscreen still depends on HTML for <iframe allowfullscreen> and for
> HTML terminating fullscreen when navigating. Does pointer lock require
> something similar?
>

Pointer lock does use the concept of the sandboxed pointer lock browsing
context flag "allow-pointer-lock"[2], which has been included in whatwg
living HTML.

I'm neutral on the potential argument of defining the sandbox flag inline
as well, it is mentioned & referenced in the pointer lock specification.


This should conclude this thread, "onpointerlockchange/onpointerlockerror
properties defined in the spec".


[1] https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=20637#c10
[2]
http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/multipage/origin-0.html#sandboxed-pointer-lock-browsing-context-flag