- From: Arthur Barstow <art.barstow@nokia.com>
- Date: Fri, 04 Apr 2014 08:40:09 -0400
- To: Ted Mielczarek <ted@mozilla.com>, public-webapps@w3.org
On 4/3/14 11:29 AM, ext Ted Mielczarek wrote: > Implementation status: Thanks for this information Ted! Re testing, are you and/or Scott going to submit tests? If not, is there someone else that can help/lead the testing effort? > Plan for last call status: > I think we'd consider the spec primarily feature complete at this point. > It seems to meet the use cases we intended. There's a lot more that > could be added to a future version, but we have two compatible > implementations shipping right now so it seems like a good place to > stop. Yes, I think that makes sense. > The only compelling thing I've seen mentioned that we should > address soon is the interaction with systems where the gamepad is also > used for controlling the browser UI, such as on consoles, which was > discussed recently on the list[2]. By soon, do you mean in v1 or a subsequent version of the spec. > There is one spec bug filed that I know describes an incompatibility > between the Chrome and Firefox implementations[3]. It's not terrible for > content authors to work around (if their code works in Chrome it will > work in Firefox), but we should tighten the spec language to make the > expected behavior there clear. I think that's the only thing that > absolutely needs doing before we could get to last call status. Given this, perhaps the "best" way forward is to address this high priority bug before a LCWD is published. I also think it would be helpful if new features and requirements beyond what is already specified were documented. As I mentioned to Vincent re PointerLock, such features can be documented in a wiki (such as [IDB-Features], Bugzilla, etc. (If you want to use a wiki for v.next tracking, I'm willing to bootstrap it.) -Thanks, Art [IDB-Features] <(If you want to use a wiki, I'm willing to bootstrap it.) >
Received on Friday, 4 April 2014 12:41:03 UTC