W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webevents@w3.org > July to September 2011

Re: Feedback on TouchEvent and DocumentTouch

From: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>
Date: Wed, 21 Sep 2011 23:25:15 +0200
To: "Matt Brubeck" <mbrubeck@mozilla.com>
Cc: public-webevents@w3.org
Message-ID: <op.v16ggd0v64w2qv@annevk-macbookpro.local>
On Wed, 21 Sep 2011 20:44:17 +0200, Matt Brubeck <mbrubeck@mozilla.com>  
wrote:
> On 09/13/2011 07:46 AM, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
>> Please do not standardize new initXXXEvent() methods. Instead use event
>> constructors like HTML, Progress Events, DOM4, etc.
>
> In our telcon this week, we decided to keep the initTouchEvent method in  
> the v1 spec.  In the v2 spec we will remove initTouchEvent and add a  
> DOM4-style constructor to replace it.
>
> Our reason for keeping this method in version 1 is that it is already  
> interoperably implemented, and we expect to need it in tests.  Removing  
> it would not allow us to finalize Touch Events v1 as a Recommendation  
> with a full test suite as quickly as we want to.

1) In your earlier email you indicated it was not implemented consistently.
2) It seems rather hard to remove if you have a test suite that requires  
it.
3) Having a feature just for a test suite is a *very* poor reason for  
having the feature. Also, you can test non-synthetic touch events  
perfectly fine without initTouchEvent().


>> Using DOM4 you could also use the "fire an event" terminology to make it
>> clear which events are trusted and which are not.
>
> This sounds good to me.  I think for v1 we will not want to depend on  
> DOM4 because it is not a recommendation yet, but we could make this  
> change for v2.  (Is this right?  I am still new to the W3C process.)
>
>> Instead of introducing a new interface called DocumentTouch please use
>> "partial interface Document" instead to extend the Document interface.
>> You need to add a reference here too for Document.
>
> I pushed a fix to both the v1 and v2 (default) branches:
> http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/webevents/rev/a4ba6867d4d0
> http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/webevents/rev/4153b586295c

Thanks!


>> Is it too late to replace these create* methods with actual constructors
>> by the way? Should we add constructors nevertheless?
>
> As I mentioned in my previous reply, I think it may be too late to  
> remove the create* methods because they are used for feature detection  
> in the wild.  However, I think we should add constructions nevertheless  
> in Touch Events v2.  Any objections?


-- 
Anne van Kesteren
http://annevankesteren.nl/
Received on Wednesday, 21 September 2011 21:26:01 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:03:53 UTC