Re: [visualViewport]: Proposal and RFC

Once the visual viewport API is shipped, its still unclear whether the
correct path would be to switch the old properties to be relative to to the
layout viewport OR fix the inconsistencies by making all the old properties
relative to the visual viewport. The latter would also fix issues like
crbug.com/489206.

You're right that switching to the layout viewport would cause the same
breakages as it did before, but the expectation is that now there is a way
to do the things that were accomplished by the old properties being
relative to the visual viewport (using the visual viewport API). That is,
this change would still break content, but we're making the APIs more
consistent and providing means to fix this broken content.



On Mon, Sep 5, 2016 at 11:58 AM Florian Rivoal <florian@rivoal.net> wrote:

> On Aug 11, 2016, at 01:32, David Bokan <bokan@google.com> wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> We've been working on the proposal for a visual viewport API at
> https://github.com/WICG/ViewportAPI. We (Chrome) would like to ship this
> feature in the nearish future but I'd like to make sure we have consensus
> that this is a good idea and the current state of the proposal is
> acceptable before we do so. The WICG repo has been pretty quiet so I'm
> hoping to get more engagement here.
>
> Please file issues on the GitHub repo or reply here with thoughts (good or
> bad). In particular, the draft spec is pretty lacking so I'd appreciate
> feedback and critiques there.
>
>
> Hi,
>
> Sorry for the slow answer.
>
> I think this is an interesting proposal. As you say, the lack of
> specification and interoperability when it comes to which viewport related
> APIs relate to which viewport is bad, and clearing this up is something we
> should do.
>
> One thing I am not entirely sure is your claim that once the new visual
> viewport API will have been out for a while, it will then be safe to switch
> the old ones to the layout viewport. If this caused breakage now, why would
> it not cause breakage in the future? Maybe new sites will pick up on the
> new API, but that won't fix the old ones. What am I missing?
>
>  - Florian
>
>