Pointer Lock 2.0

10.1 9.1 Relative view-port rotation of free moving virtual actors

A player on a first/third person game will need to control the view-port orientation. A widely used method is the use of mouse movements to control the viewing angle. This kind of application can use the Pointer Lock API to allow a complete freedom of control over the viewport's yaw and pitch even when the user is not pressing mouse buttons. Those buttons can be used for other actions while constantly providing navigation via mouse movement.

10.2 9.2 Free rotation of 3D models or panning of 2D layers

Users of a three dimensional modeling application will need to rotate models. A application can use the Pointer Lock API to enable the author to rotate the model freely in a drag operation without limiting motion. Without pointer lock a drag would stop providing motion data when the mouse cursor is limited by the edge of the screen.

Similarly, absolute motion panning of a large two dimensional image could be permitted in a single drag operation without cursor / screen limits.

10.3 9.3 Relative movement of actors

A player on a fast reflexes game controls a paddle to bounce back a ball to the opponent, while allowing the same paddle to execute actions based on different mouse buttons being pressed. The application can use the Pointer Lock API to allow the player to react quickly without being concerned about the mouse cursor leaving the game play area and clicking another system application, thus breaking the game flow.

10.4 9.4 Jog movement over spinner controls

When modifying numerically magnitudes in applications sometimes the user will prefer to "drag" a numeric control by its button handles to increment or decrement the numeric value. E.g. a spinner with a number entry text box and arrows pointing up and down that can be clicked or dragged on to change the value. An application could use the Pointer Lock API to allow modifying the numeric values beyond what the logical screen bounds allow. The same could apply for a control that fast forwards or rewinds a video or audio stream like a "jog".

10.5 9.5 Synthetic cursor interaction with HTML DOM UI

Some games use a classical cursor, however they want it to be limited or controlled in some manner. E.g. limited to the bounds of the game, or movable by the game. Locking the pointer enables this if the application creates their own cursor. However HTML and DOM should still be available to use for user interface. Synthetic mouse events should be permitted to allow an application defined cursor to interact with DOM. E.g. the following code should permit a custom cursor to send click events while the pointer is locked:

document.addEventListener("click", function (e) {
  if (e._isSynthetic)
    return;
  // send a synthetic click
  var ee = document.createEvent("MouseEvents");
  ee._isSynthetic = true;
  x = myCursor.x;
  y = myCursor.y;
  ee.initMouseEvent("click", true, true, null, 1,
                    x + e.screenX - e.clientX,
                    y + e.screenY - e.clientY,
                    x,
                    y);
  var target = document.elementFromPoint(x, y);
  if (target)
    target.dispatchEvent(ee);
});

Note that synthetic clicks may not be permitted by a user agent to produce the same default action as a non-synthetic click. However, application handlers can still take action and provide user interface with existing HTML & DOM mechanisms.

10.6 9.6 View-port panning by moving a mouse cursor against the bounds of a view-port.

Real Time Strategy games often use this technique. When the player moves the pointer to the view-port borders, if they "push" the border with a mouse movement, the view-port is panned over the game area according to how much they move the mouse. When moving the mouse cursor within the bounds of the view port it acts at is typically would on a system. Applications may choose to implement this using pointer lock and the previous use case of "Synthetic cursor interaction with HTML DOM UI" to bring cursor behavior completely under their control.

10.7 9.7 Game Lobby, timer based pointer lock

Games that use pointer lock may desire a traditional UI and system cursor while players prepare in a game lobby. Games usually start after a short timer when all players are ready. Ideally the game could then switch to pointer lock mode without requiring an engagement gesture a user activation . Players should be able to seamlessly move from the game lobby into game navigation.

10.8 9.8 Game Portal

Game portals, and other sites such as Facebook and Google Plus, host games for users to play. These games may be hosted and served from a different origin from that of the portal site. Embedded games should be able to lock the pointer, even in non-full screen mode.

12.1 11.1 Why not merge with Mouse Capture: setCapture()?

Mouse Capture [ MDN-SETCAPTURE ] handles low security risk mouse event target lock for the duration of a mouse drag gesture. Pointer lock removes the concept of the cursor and directs all events to a given target. They are related, but different.

If a browser implemented both, it would be reasonable to support a combination of traits: The security simplicity of "automatically release lock when mouse up" and the increased functionality of total control over mouse input and removal of the system cursor. The security trait would allow more permissive use of the feature for applications that only required a short burst of pointer lock during a drag event.

This functionality is omitted from the initial version of this spec because it helps the minor use cases in windowed mode but we still do not have an implementation solving the major ones. And, to implement this a browser must implement both, which none does yet. It is not clear if this feature should live on .lock or on .setCapture. If both were implemented, either API could be augmented fairly easily to offer the hybrid functionality.

12.2 11.2 Why not repurpose MouseEvent's .clientX/Y .screenX/Y?

Even in non locked state, the delta values of mouse movement are useful. Changing the meaning of .client or .screen based on lock state would also cause easy errors in code not carefully monitoring the lock state.

12.3 11.3 Why use .movementX/Y instead of .deltaX/Y?

When the pointer is locked 'wheel' events should be sent to the pointer lock target element just as 'mousemove' events are. There is a naming conflict with .deltaX/Y/Z as defined in DOM 3 'wheel' event .

12.4 11.4 Why bundle all functionality (hiding cursor, providing mouse deltas) instead of using CSS to hide the cursor, always providing delta values, and offering an API to restrict the cursor movement to a portion of the web page?

There are good motivations to provide a more fine grained approach. E.g. the use case "View-port panning by moving a mouse cursor against the bounds of a view-port" doesn't require hiding the mouse cursor, only bounding it and always having delta values available. Also, this specification defines the movement deltas to be taken from how the system mouse cursor moves, which incorporates operating system filtering and acceleration of the mouse movement data. Applications may desire access to a more raw form of movement data prior to adjustments appropriate for a mouse cursor. Also, raw data may provide better than pixel level accuracy for movement, as well as higher frequency updates. Providing the raw delta movement would also not require special permission or mode from a user, and for some set of applications that do not require bounding the cursor may reduce the security barriers and prompts needed.

There are two justifications for postponing this finer grained approach. The first is a concern of specifying what units mouse movement data are provided in. This specification defines .movementX/Y precisely as the same values that could be recorded when the mouse is not under lock by changes in .screenX/Y. Implementations across multiple user agents and operating systems will easily be able to meet that requirement and provide application developers and users with a consistent experience. Further, users are expected to have already configured the full system of hardware input and operating system options resulting in a comfortable control the system mouse cursor. By specifying .movementX/Y in the same units mouse lock API applications will be instantly usable to all users because they have already settled their preferences.

Secondly, the implementation of providing movement data and bounding the mouse cursor is more difficult in the fine grained approach. Bundling the features together gives implementations freedom to use a variety of techniques as appropriate on each operating system and is more practical to implement. Direct APIs do not exist on major desktop platforms (Windows, Mac OS X, Linux) to bound the cursor to a specific rectangle, and prototypes have not yet been developed to demonstrate building that behavior by e.g. invisible windows with Xlib or manual cursor movement on Mac. Unaccelerated Delta values have been proposed to be accessed by reading raw Human Interface Device (HID) data. E.g. WM_INPUT messages on Windows, and USB device APIs on Mac OS X / Linux. The challenge here is interpreting and normalizing the units to some consistent and specifiable scale. Also, most APIs considered to date are limited to USB devices.

It would be reasonable to consider adding these capabilities in the future, as the currently specified pointer lock API would be easy to continue to support if the finer grained delta and confinement features were implemented.

The bundled API is selected for implementation practicality, because the desired use cases are supported, and because it will not conflict with future improvements as discussed here.

12.5 11.5 High resolution deltas / High frequency updates?

Not yet, for the same reasons in the previous question: "Why bundle all functionality (hiding cursor, providing mouse deltas) instead of using CSS to hide the cursor, always providing delta values, and offering an API to restrict the cursor movement to a portion of the web page?" .

12.6 11.6 Why modify MouseEvent and reuse existing mouse events instead of creating a mouse delta event?

When under pointer lock many mouse events remain relevant, e.g. click, mousedown, etc. These all share the same event data structure MouseEvent. If movement data were reported via a new data structure then a new event would be needed for reporting delta movement. The new data structure would have many parallels to MouseEvent to offer the same conveniences, e.g. button and modifier key states. When handling click, down, and up events would the existing mousedown, mouseup be used? If so, they would provide .clientX/Y and .screenX/Y with no useful data, but would lack the convenience of containing the current movement data. Or, new events would also be required for when the mouse is locked.

Also, movementX/Y are convenient even when the mouse is not locked. This spec requires movement members to always be valid, even when the mouse cursor exists. This reduces code required to track the last cursor state and mouseover/mouseout transitions if applications wish to make use of delta motion of the mouse.

The only negative of adding movementX/Y to MouseEvent appears to be the unused values in clientX/Y and screenX/Y when under pointer lock. This does not seem to be a significant problem.

Therefore the minimal change to add movementX/Y to MouseEvent is selected to reduce API and implementation complexity.

12.7 11.7 Why separate targets for mouse events under pointer lock and keyboard input focus?

Consider a game with a 3D view controlled by moving the mouse cursor, while the user may still chat with other users via a text console. It is reasonable for the application to accept text input to an element that is different than where mouse events are being dispatched. This is similar to pre-existing behavior of receiving mousemove events over any element while typing into a form on a page.