W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > September 2016

Re: [visualViewport]: Proposal and RFC

From: Rick Byers <rbyers@chromium.org>
Date: Thu, 8 Sep 2016 15:31:12 -0400
Message-ID: <CAFUtAY-vdCOCtAAjpe=M_KOWh1jFTjSks13uZ-Pm_S5KMdoD5w@mail.gmail.com>
To: Yash Malik <ymalik@google.com>
Cc: Florian Rivoal <florian@rivoal.net>, David Bokan <bokan@google.com>, W3C www-style mailing list <www-style@w3.org>
I've added ViewportAPI to the TPAC agenda
<https://wiki.csswg.org/planning/tpac-2016?&#proposed-agenda>.  If desired
I can give a short presentation and lead a discussion on some of the
issues.  But I don't have all the context Yash and David do, so we may want
to do most of the detailed API debate on GitHub where they can participate.

On Wed, Sep 7, 2016 at 10:32 AM, Yash Malik <ymalik@google.com> wrote:

> Rick (cc-ed) from our team will be at TPAC. Feel free to discuss this with
> him.
> Please file github issues on the WICG repo
> <https://github.com/WICG/ViewportAPI> for posterity though :).
> On Tue, Sep 6, 2016 at 9:33 PM Florian Rivoal <florian@rivoal.net> wrote:
>> On Sep 7, 2016, at 06:16, Yash Malik <ymalik@google.com> wrote:
>> 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.
>> Will you (or someone else at Google who's familiar with the proposal) be
>> at TPAC? It'd be nice if you could join the CSSWG meeting and walk the
>> group through the proposal and the open issues.
>> If not, we can still work on it via mail / github, but that could be a
>> good opportunity to kick start things.
>>  - Florian
Received on Thursday, 8 September 2016 19:32:03 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 25 March 2022 10:09:04 UTC