On 13/12/2014 05:58, Ben Peters wrote:
You all have excellent points, thank you! Device Independent Events
gets straight to the point, and I like that. Are there any objections
to calling this concept Device Independent Events?
[...]
The reason I want to have this broad conversation about
At a frist glance I almost agreed with you, Björn.
Note though that, in terms of output, these events we’re talking about are
adapted to the input method used to generate them. We’re not any more talking
about device specific events, like “mouse click” or “key press”. One of these
events could
On Thu, Dec 11, 2014 at 8:47 PM, Ben Peters ben.pet...@microsoft.com
wrote:
There has been a lot of debate [1][2] about the correct name for device
independent events [3] as a concept*. We have considered Intention Events,
Command Events, and Action Events among others. I believe we now have a
On 12/12/2014 08:38, Frederico Knabben wrote:
At a frist glance I almost agreed with you, Björn.
Note though that, in terms of output, these events we’re talking about
are adapted to the input method used to generate them. We’re not any
more talking about device specific events, like “mouse
On Fri, Dec 12, 2014 at 1:00 PM, Arthur Barstow art.bars...@gmail.com
wrote:
What is your counter-proposal?
Heh.
Fair enough, I guess. :)
These seem related to what Java calls semantic events [JAVADOC], so I'd
give that a try to see if it fits the model. If not, would abstract
events or
On Fri, 12 Dec 2014 13:39:47 +0100, Tobie Langel tobie.lan...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Fri, Dec 12, 2014 at 1:00 PM, Arthur Barstow art.bars...@gmail.com
wrote:
What is your counter-proposal?
Heh.
Fair enough, I guess. :)
These seem related to what Java calls semantic events [JAVADOC], so
] Responsive Input Terminology
sounds quite reasonable to me.
12.12.2014, 16:41, Simon Pieters sim...@opera.com:
On Fri, 12 Dec 2014 13:39:47 +0100, Tobie Langel
tobie.lan...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Fri, Dec 12, 2014 at 1:00 PM, Arthur Barstow
art.bars...@gmail.com
wrote:
What is your
On Friday, 12 December 2014 at 14:40, Simon Pieters wrote:
How about device-independent events?
Aren’t we missing what kinds of events we’re talking about? We would just know
that those events are device-independent.
So far we’ve been talking about “input” events. If this is still the case,
On 12/12/2014 13:40, Simon Pieters wrote:
How about device-independent events?
I always liked input agnostic, but that's probably too religiously
loaded a term for some...
P
--
Patrick H. Lauke
www.splintered.co.uk | https://github.com/patrickhlauke
http://flickr.com/photos/redux/ |
You all have excellent points, thank you! Device Independent Events gets
straight to the point, and I like that. Are there any objections to calling
this concept Device Independent Events?
My goal with Responsive Input Events was to encourage web developers to use
them as part of the
On Fri, 12 Dec 2014 17:02:25 +0100, Frederico Knabben
f.knab...@cksource.com wrote:
On Friday, 12 December 2014 at 14:40, Simon Pieters wrote:
How about device-independent events?
Aren’t we missing what kinds of events we’re talking about? We would
just know that those events are
[cross-posted]
There has been a lot of debate [1][2] about the correct name for device
independent events [3] as a concept*. We have considered Intention Events,
Command Events, and Action Events among others. I believe we now have a good
name for them- Responsive Input Events. The reason for
:48 AM
To: public-editing-tf; public-webapps@w3.org; public-indie...@w3.org;
public-h...@w3.org
Subject: [editing] Responsive Input Terminology
[cross-posted]
There has been a lot of debate [1][2] about the correct name for device
independent events [3] as a concept*. We have considered Intention
* Ben Peters wrote:
There has been a lot of debate [1][2] about the correct name for device
independent events [3] as a concept*. We have considered Intention
Events, Command Events, and Action Events among others. I believe we now
have a good name for them- Responsive Input Events. The reason
14 matches
Mail list logo
