Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

adding multitouch extension #142

Merged
merged 9 commits into from Jan 11, 2021
Merged

adding multitouch extension #142

merged 9 commits into from Jan 11, 2021

Conversation

fernando-80
Copy link
Contributor

@fernando-80 fernando-80 commented Oct 15, 2020

Closes #27

The following tasks have been completed:

  • Modified Web platform tests (link to pull request)

Implementation commitment:

@fernando-80
Copy link
Contributor Author

@nondebug this is the multitouch extension spec
@knyg

extensions.html Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
extensions.html Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
extensions.html Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
extensions.html Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
extensions.html Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
extensions.html Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
extensions.html Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
readonly attribute unsigned long touchId;
readonly attribute octet surfaceId;
readonly attribute Float32Array position;
readonly attribute Uint32Array? surfaceDimensions;
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Why not just an empty array?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Hi @marcoscaceres we thought about representing the absent surfaceDimensions with "null". Would there be any advantages to use the empty array instead? thanks~

@marcoscaceres
Copy link
Member

@fernando-80, just wondering, are you affiliated with a W3C/WebAppsWG member company?

@marcoscaceres
Copy link
Member

Another thing I thought of, there might be some overlap with the exciting Touch Events spec. It might be worth checking if there anything we could reuse from that... maybe not, but just might be worth exploring.

@fernando-80
Copy link
Contributor Author

fernando-80 commented Oct 29, 2020

@fernando-80, just wondering, are you affiliated with a W3C/WebAppsWG member company?

Hi @marcoscaceres ! Nice to e-meet you! Thanks for your review! Yes, I report to Kelvin (@knyg) and I am Steve's (@sagoston) peer at Sony. We are working with Firefox and Matt/Chromium ( @nondebug ) implementing it.

fernando-80 and others added 6 commits October 28, 2020 18:59
Co-authored-by: Marcos Cáceres <marcos@marcosc.com>
Co-authored-by: Marcos Cáceres <marcos@marcosc.com>
Co-authored-by: Marcos Cáceres <marcos@marcosc.com>
Co-authored-by: Marcos Cáceres <marcos@marcosc.com>
Co-authored-by: Marcos Cáceres <marcos@marcosc.com>
Co-authored-by: Marcos Cáceres <marcos@marcosc.com>
@marcoscaceres
Copy link
Member

Thanks @fernando-80! that's excellent to hear.

Ok, found it in Firefox:
https://searchfox.org/mozilla-central/source/dom/webidl/Gamepad.webidl#110

@marcoscaceres
Copy link
Member

Checked WPT - we don't have any Web Platform Tests for this yet. Let's see if we can put together a list of possible tests from the spec text.

fernando-80 and others added 2 commits October 29, 2020 22:28
Co-authored-by: Marcos Cáceres <marcos@marcosc.com>
@sagoston sagoston merged commit df14180 into w3c:gh-pages Jan 11, 2021
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Determine how Multi-touch surfaces should be handled.
4 participants