W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > whatwg@whatwg.org > October 2011

[whatwg] Fullscreen Update

From: James Graham <jgraham@opera.com>
Date: Mon, 31 Oct 2011 19:52:58 +0100 (CET)
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.00.1110311940570.8562@sirius>


On Sat, 29 Oct 2011, Robert O'Callahan wrote:

> On Wed, Oct 19, 2011 at 11:57 PM, James Graham <jgraham at opera.com> wrote:
>
>> On 10/19/2011 06:40 AM, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
>>
>>  Is that an acceptable limitation? Alternatively we could postpone the
>>> nested fullscreen scenario for now (i.e. make requestFullscreen fail if
>>> already fullscreen).
>>>
>>
>> I think punting on this makes sense. Pages can detect the failure and do
>> something sane (make the element take the whole viewport size). If the
>> feature becomes necessary we can add it in v2.
>>
>
> I don't think punting on nested fullscreen is a good idea. It's not some
> edge case that most applications can't hit. For example, it will come up
> with any content that can go full-screen and can contain an embedded
> Youtube video. (It'll come up even more often if browser fullscreen UI is
> integrated with DOM fullscreen, which we definitely plan to do in Firefox.)
> If we don't support nested fullscreen well, then the user experience will
> be either
> -- making the video fullscreen while the containing content is already
> fullscreen simply doesn't work, or
> -- the video can go fullscreen, but when you exit fullscreen on the video,
> the containing content also loses fullscreen
> Both of these are clearly broken IMHO.

Presumably the embeded video could detect that it was already in a 
fullscreen environment and deal with it accordingly. So in theory we could 
wait and see if people just do that before deciding that we have to 
implement the more complex thing. But that might be unnecessarily 
difficult and easy to get wrong. So maybe we should just deal with this 
now.
Received on Monday, 31 October 2011 11:52:58 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wednesday, 22 January 2020 16:59:37 UTC