- From: Rick Byers <rbyers@chromium.org>
- Date: Fri, 25 Apr 2014 15:32:58 -0400
- To: "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>
- Cc: François REMY <francois.remy.dev@outlook.com>, Oren Freiberg <oren.freiberg@microsoft.com>, CSS WG <www-style@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <CAFUtAY9owUAq5SjYDv3eWk0Wrqek5sL9YyDXUjsTXRarPx-wEQ@mail.gmail.com>
On Thu, Apr 24, 2014 at 9:20 PM, Oren Freiberg <oren.freiberg@microsoft.com> wrote: > It seems Rick felt we should match both but it looks like Chrome never > implemented it. Rick do you still feel the same way and plan on > implementing a solution that supports matching both fine and coarse on a > hybrid device? > > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2013Apr/0534.html I'd like to yes, but I didn't want to change anything here (or even finish our implementation of this feature) until this was reflected in the spec (indicating there was some kind of consensus here). My understanding from my last discussion with Tab was that he planned to update the spec to explicitly state that setting BOTH coarse and fine was OK when multiple input devices are considered 'primary'. In general I haven't heard much interested from other vendors on these MQ features, so I've been hesitant to commit ourselves beyond the minimal pointer:coarse support we added. If IE was interested in these, I'm sure we could quickly come to an agreement on behavior that we'd both implement :-) See http://crbug.com/174553 for the Chromium feature request to detect this scenario separately and http://crbug.com/136119 for the rest of our remaining work on these features. On Fri, Apr 25, 2014 at 1:42 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>wrote: > [please don't top-post] > > On Fri, Apr 25, 2014 at 9:29 AM, François REMY > <francois.remy.dev@outlook.com> wrote: > > My understanding of the spec is that the paragraph about the exact values > > being matched is not normative (no “should”, no “must”), and this > behavior > > is therefore left to the user agent’s own discretion. That being said, > > there’s a notion of “primary” input device -- you do not have to report a > > value for all input modes, only the ones that are considered primary. > > This is exactly what I would have said, so I'll just +1 it. > I agree we need to give the UA flexibility here. We were also thinking about accessibility scenarios - in some such cases even a mouse should be considered 'coarse'. Rick > ~TJ > >
Received on Friday, 25 April 2014 19:33:47 UTC