On Mon, 21 Aug 2006 22:58:26 +0200, Doug Schepers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
| When "mouse wheeling" occurs, the implementation must dispatch a
| <code>mousemultiwheel</code> event implementing the following
| interface:
I still prefer Bjoern's suggestion of "mouseomniwheel" since it indicates
multiple directions, rather than multiple mice.
I'm fine either way.
| wheelDeltaX is a number indicating the distance (positive
| means rotated to
| the right, negative means rotated to the left).
I would say "indicating the horizontal distance".
Sure, changed.
| wheelDeltaY is a number indicating the distance (positive
| means rotated
| away from user or to the right, negative means rotated
| towards user or to
| the left).
I would say "indicating the vertical distance".
Sure, changed.
Should we consider yoking wheelDeltaZ to zooming?
Perhaps, what do other people think?
| The default value of wheelDeltaX, wheelDeltaY and wheelDeltaZ is 0.
| UIEvent.detail must always be 0.
|
| XXX: wheelDeltaY -> wheelDelta?
I thought we agreed that this model is not backwards-compatible, and
that we would provide a pass-through for "mousewheel" that would use
wheelDelta.
Backwards compatible or not, it might make sense for authors that the
field has the same name. Granted, it makes a lot of sense to name it
wheelDeltaY too... Removed the note.
| For both <code>mousemultiwheel</code> and <code>mousewheel</code>
| <code>MouseEvent.relatedNode</code> must point to the element being
| wheel'd over or <code>null</code> if there is no such element. (For
| example, when using some device without a pointer but with
| some way to
| wheel you'd get that.)
| ===
I like this part. It will allow for context-specific wheel controls,
like dials and custom scrolling list, or zooming in on a particular
element.
The wording could use some refining, but the intent suits me. What about
something like,
"For both <code>mousemultiwheel</code> and <code>mousewheel</code>,
<code>MouseEvent.relatedNode</code> must indicate the element over which
the
pointer is located, or if there is no such element (in the case where the
device does not have a pointer, but does have a wheel) the current
focused
element, or <code>null</code> in the absence of an element."
The currently focused element is always available through
document.activeElement. I'm not sure it should be integrated here as well.
What's the use case? The rest of the wording seems fine though.
The proposal is now in CVS...
http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2006/webapi/DOM-Level-3-Events/proposals/mousewheel.txt
I should probably do something about the line wrapping but I don't really
care at the moment.
--
Anne van Kesteren
<http://annevankesteren.nl/>
<http://www.opera.com/>
