W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webapps@w3.org > October to December 2015

[pointerlock] Oct 2015 Pointer Lock Status

From: Vincent Scheib <scheib@google.com>
Date: Fri, 23 Oct 2015 13:57:06 -0700
Message-ID: <CAK-EfXmcpyHnw7Bko_v7__amFPnR0fHHqrV5V2Vk0dqr-e08xQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Webapps WG <public-webapps@w3.org>
Pointer lock reached Candidate Recommendation in Dec 2013. [CR]

Implementation status: (Edge and Opera have changed status since October
2014)
  Chrome: Implemented.
  Firefox: Implemented with prefix.
  Edge: Implemented in Preview Build 10532+ (Edge 13) [Edge]
  Opera: Implemented.
  Safari: No implementation progress known.
http://caniuse.com/#search=pointer summarizes this well.


Test suite (has not changed since Jan 2014):
  Two basic tests exist:
    http://w3c-test.org/pointerlock/constructor.html
    http://w3c-test.org/pointerlock/idlharness.html

  * Firefox fails due to prefixing.
  * Chrome & Opera fail IDL tests due to seemingly unrelated issues.

Testharness tests are not currently able to test the core Pointer Lock
features, which would require user gesures (mouse clicks) and synthesizing
mouse movement. No progress is seen here for this specification, but the
challenge is present for several. E.g. Web Bluetooth brought up this
concern recently [Platform Testing] on public-test-infra, but with no
response. I have requested Jeffrey Yasskin and Sam Uong from Chrome to
discuss this topic at TPAC.


Specification:
  https://w3c.github.io/pointerlock/
  Minor changes in last year (small IDL fixes, typos/grammar):
    https://github.com/w3c/pointerlock/commits/gh-pages
  Feature Requests page moved to github:
    https://github.com/w3c/pointerlock/blob/gh-pages/FeatureRequests.md


Next Steps:

In the Candidate Recommendation Call for Comments [CR-CfC] Arthur Barstow
proposed exit criteria:
"""
During the Candidate Recommendation period, which ends @T+3months, the
WG will complete its test suite. Before this specification exits
Candidate Recommendation, two or more independent implementations must
pass each test, although no single implementation must pass each test.
The group will also create an Implementation Report.
"""

Robust cross browser testing, as mentioned above, is challenging and I
question if browser vendors will implement sufficient support, e.g. via Web
Driver or other means. This leaves a discussion of how much testing is
practical vs implicit demonstration of implementation consistency via
application use.

Feature use exists in typically smaller projects. For example
http://a-way-to-go.com/. Potential for higher use remains. 3D game engines
exist, and a significant industry tool Unity 3D continues to improve their
HTML export. [Unity3D HTML5]

Working group questions:
  * How much testing is practically required to move to Proposed?
  * Ready for 'wider' review?

[CR] https://www.w3.org/blog/news/archives/3529
[CR-CfC]
https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2013OctDec/0648.html
[Edge]
https://dev.modern.ie/platform/status/pointerlockmouselock/?filter=f3f0000bf&search=pointer%20lock
[Platform Testing]
https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-test-infra/2015JulSep/0017.html
[Unity3D HTML5] http://docs.unity3d.com/Manual/webgl-building.html
Received on Friday, 23 October 2015 20:58:06 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 18:14:58 UTC