- From: Oren Freiberg <oren.freiberg@microsoft.com>
- Date: Tue, 29 Apr 2014 18:51:28 +0000
- To: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>, Rick Byers <rbyers@chromium.org>
- CC: François REMY <francois.remy.dev@outlook.com>, CSS WG <www-style@w3.org>
>>> Tab Atkins wrote: >>>> I think this is probably a reasonable approach to the problem of >>>> detecting whether it's even *possible* for a user to do something. >>>> I'd keep the MQs as written today, and just add another pair called >>>> "any-pointer" and "any-hover" which address the rest of the inputs. >>> Yes, that would be ok; "any-hover" looked a bit strange to me, which >>> is why I figured out we should maybe merge the two, but it seeems >>> understandable. >> That seems OK to me. This also has the nice benefit (in contrast to >> some of the other options we've discussed) as being compatible with >> what we've already shipped in Chrome. It does sounds reasonable but let me recap to make sure I do understand it correctly. So we will keep the syntax today and add 'any-pointer' and 'any-hover'. To clarify the existing syntax will match the primary form of input 'pointer' and will only match one value at a time but the 'any-pointer' keyword could match multiple values if there are multiple input devices. So for example on a hybrid device like a laptop with a touch screen (Yoga) we would match the fine input device to the existing keyword 'pointer' while we would match coarse to 'any-pointer'? Also the UA would determine the primary form of input.
Received on Tuesday, 29 April 2014 18:52:00 UTC