Re: Adding implementor's note about event targets?

This change looks good to me too.


On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 7:42 PM, Sangwhan Moon <smoon@opera.com> wrote:

>
> On Mar 21, 2013, at 4:37 AM, Arthur Barstow wrote:
>
> > On 3/20/13 1:42 PM, ext Olli Pettay wrote:
> >> On 03/01/2013 03:45 PM, Rick Byers wrote:
> >>> Thanks for pushing on this Sangwhan, I agree having some wording is
> >>> valuable given the issues we've had.
> >>>
> >>> I want to make sure I understand what the wording means (and ideally
> >>> matches our implementation).  When you say 'touch sequence' you mean
> >>> the sequence of events for a given touchID, right?  Don't we want to
> >>> be stronger than that - making restrictions across multiple touches?
> >>> Perhaps something along the lines of the following (with improved
> >>> wording - this is rough):
> >>>
> >>> User agents must ensure that all Touch objects available from a given
> >>> TouchEvent are all relative to the same document that the TouchEvent
> >>> was dispatched too.  To implement this, user agents should maintain a
> >>> notion of the current touch-active document.  On first touch, this is
> >>> set to the target of the touch.  When all active touch points are
> >>> released, the touch-active document is cleared.  All TouchEvents are
> >>> dispatched to the current touch-active document, and each Touch object
> >>> it contains refers only to DOM elements (and co-ordinates) in that
> >>> document.  If a touch starts entirely outside the currently
> >>> touch-active document, then it is ignored entirely.
> >>>
> >>> Does this match all the implementations?  I'm pretty sure this is what
> >>> Chrome does.  Olli?
> >>
> >> Yes, matches Gecko. (and I believe Safari+Webkit too)
> >
> > I went ahead and checked in a change that includes the text proposed
> earlier [1]. This commit puts the Note in a new non-normative section 5.2.
> >
> > Changeset: <https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/webevents/rev/6f2c52cd50f6>
> > Spec: <
> https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/webevents/raw-file/v1/touchevents.html#touchevent-implementer-s-note
> >
> >
> > Sangwhan, Rick - for the purposes of the LC comment tracking, please let
> us know if this is acceptable or not, and in case it is not, please propose
> text that will address your concerns.
>
> Art, Thanks for following up on this. Looks good to me too.
>
> (As noted earlier - the last sentence doesn't match Presto's behavior, but
> upcoming
> Opera will have matching behavior so it shouldn't be that much of a
> issue..)
>
> --
> Sangwhan Moon, Opera Software ASA
>
>
>