New issue
Advanced search Search tips

Issue 769796 link

Starred by 2 users

Issue metadata

Status: Assigned
Owner:
Cc:
Components:
EstimatedDays: ----
NextAction: ----
OS: Linux , Android , Windows , Chrome , Mac , Fuchsia
Pri: 3
Type: Bug



Sign in to add a comment

mousedown shouldn't be a user gesture?

Project Member Reported by mustaq@chromium.org, Sep 28 2017

Issue description

Firefox doesn't consider mousedown to be a user gesture.  This seems to be the right model because a mousedown is not a reliable indicator that the user intends activate something.

One user behavior that particularly supports this argument is that when a user accidentally/inadvertently presses the mouse button on a link/button, it is common to avoid a click (activation) by dragging the mouse pointer out of the button/link and then releasing the mouse button.

In Chrome we did a similar fix for touchstart:  Issue 611981 .

A secondary motivation for wanting to remove mousedown user gesture is that this has resulted in a complicated token passing in our mouse event handling because a mousedown and mouseup must share a single token.  One particular complication: mousedown gets handled by EventHandler before the event goes to a plugin which acquires the mouse lock, as a result the mouseup goes to the plugin directly.  Now that plugin mouseup code should share Blink's mousedown token!

---

If we agree that this is the right thing to do, we will also need to convince both Edge & Safari to do the same.


 

Comment 1 by mustaq@chromium.org, Sep 28 2017

Components: Blink>Input
Labels: Hotlist-Input-Dev Hotlist-Interop
Labels: UserActivation
Blocking: 780250

Comment 4 by a...@chromium.org, Nov 2 2017

Blocking: -780250
For records: for  Issue 780250 , mousedown being a user gesture is one part of the problem.  The real problem is ownership of gestures.

I won't start working on this bug this quarter.
Labels: -OS-iOS

Comment 7 by mustaq@chromium.org, Mar 15 2018

Cc: alex...@chromium.org
Here is a third motivation to go for it: the complicated token passing/merging we have (mentioned in my original post) doesn't even work with OOPIFs.

Sign in to add a comment