> 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?
You entirely missed this quote in the article. How do you explain that?
https://code.google.com/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=162757#c...
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.
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.
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.