3 ms·

> If we had Apple on board with PE, we’d still be on board too. You entirely missed this quote in the article. How do you explain that?

by pcx 12y ago

mbel 12y ago
It seems worth noticing that this is more political than technological argument. Google choose not to implement Pointer Events and used Apple as a scapegoat. I'm not happy with Apple's decision, but I'm even less happy with Google using Apple as some kind of feature implementation oracle.
- pcx 12y ago
  The OP is also critical of Google. But doesn't make Apple any less wrong.
- fpgeek 12y ago
  This isn't Google using Apple as a feature implementation oracle, this is Google looking at pointer events using both their "web developer" and "browser developer" hats and reaching a disappointing conclusion. As a web developer, Google would have to use Touch Events because that's all that Apple supports. Chrome already supports Touch Events. That covers the overwhelming majority of their touch-enabled users, with code they already have. Rewriting that to use a newer modern standard everywhere is one thing, but writing a second implementation with no path to sunsetting the first is much harder to justify. Coming full circle, if Google's web developers aren't going to use Pointer Events for the forseeable future, it is hard to justify Google the browser developer putting them high on their priority list.
  - mbel 12y ago
    Thanks for the reply, honestly I haven't thought about Google as web developer. Another point that I unfortunately missed is that if Apple implemented Pointer Events in WebKit, then the changes could probably be ported very quickly to Blink (I guess both code bases are still largely similar).
idonthaveaname 12y ago
Can you prove the quote was not spin to make Google appear to have the moral high-ground here?
542458 12y ago
The author is cherrypicking here. See what Google actually said: https://code.google.com/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=162757#c64 https://code.google.com/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=162757#c... https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1qRqLKQjOnGgrM-UkMAb2RH6mQCFQHk8R01s5qvjm2Po/edit#slide=id.g355c5631f_129 https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1qRqLKQjOnGgrM-UkMAb2... Look at the slide notes on slide 6. They make a compelling technical and business argument against it; a reason the author acknowledges and dismisses because doesn't align with his thesis.
coldtea 12y ago
As a BS excuse?

> If we had Apple on board with PE, we’d still be on board too. You entirely missed this quote in the article. How do you explain that?

by pcx 12y ago

> If we had Apple on board with PE, we’d still be on board too. You entirely missed this quote in the article. How do you explain that?

mbel 12y ago

It seems worth noticing that this is more political than technological argument. Google choose not to implement Pointer Events and used Apple as a scapegoat. I'm not happy with Apple's decision, but I'm even less happy with Google using Apple as some kind of feature implementation oracle.

pcx 12y ago
The OP is also critical of Google. But doesn't make Apple any less wrong.
fpgeek 12y ago
This isn't Google using Apple as a feature implementation oracle, this is Google looking at pointer events using both their "web developer" and "browser developer" hats and reaching a disappointing conclusion. As a web developer, Google would have to use Touch Events because that's all that Apple supports. Chrome already supports Touch Events. That covers the overwhelming majority of their touch-enabled users, with code they already have. Rewriting that to use a newer modern standard everywhere is one thing, but writing a second implementation with no path to sunsetting the first is much harder to justify. Coming full circle, if Google's web developers aren't going to use Pointer Events for the forseeable future, it is hard to justify Google the browser developer putting them high on their priority list.
- mbel 12y ago
  Thanks for the reply, honestly I haven't thought about Google as web developer. Another point that I unfortunately missed is that if Apple implemented Pointer Events in WebKit, then the changes could probably be ported very quickly to Blink (I guess both code bases are still largely similar).

idonthaveaname 12y ago

Can you prove the quote was not spin to make Google appear to have the moral high-ground here?

542458 12y ago

The author is cherrypicking here. See what Google actually said: https://code.google.com/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=162757#c64 https://code.google.com/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=162757#c... https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1qRqLKQjOnGgrM-UkMAb2RH6mQCFQHk8R01s5qvjm2Po/edit#slide=id.g355c5631f_129 https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1qRqLKQjOnGgrM-UkMAb2... Look at the slide notes on slide 6. They make a compelling technical and business argument against it; a reason the author acknowledges and dismisses because doesn't align with his thesis.

coldtea 12y ago

As a BS excuse?