On 4/3/14 11:29 AM, ext Ted Mielczarek wrote:
Implementation status:
Thanks for this information Ted!
Re testing, are you and/or Scott going to submit tests? If not, is there
someone else that can help/lead the testing effort?
Plan for last call status:
I think we'd consider the spec primarily feature complete at this point.
It seems to meet the use cases we intended. There's a lot more that
could be added to a future version, but we have two compatible
implementations shipping right now so it seems like a good place to
stop.
Yes, I think that makes sense.
The only compelling thing I've seen mentioned that we should
address soon is the interaction with systems where the gamepad is also
used for controlling the browser UI, such as on consoles, which was
discussed recently on the list[2].
By soon, do you mean in v1 or a subsequent version of the spec.
There is one spec bug filed that I know describes an incompatibility
between the Chrome and Firefox implementations[3]. It's not terrible for
content authors to work around (if their code works in Chrome it will
work in Firefox), but we should tighten the spec language to make the
expected behavior there clear. I think that's the only thing that
absolutely needs doing before we could get to last call status.
Given this, perhaps the "best" way forward is to address this high
priority bug before a LCWD is published.
I also think it would be helpful if new features and requirements beyond
what is already specified were documented. As I mentioned to Vincent re
PointerLock, such features can be documented in a wiki (such as
[IDB-Features], Bugzilla, etc.
(If you want to use a wiki for v.next tracking, I'm willing to bootstrap
it.)
-Thanks, Art
[IDB-Features] <(If you want to use a wiki, I'm willing to bootstrap it.) >
