Csswg-drafts: [mediaqueries-4] interaction media features (any-pointer, etc) still at risk?

[myakura]

I found that the hover, any-hover, pointer, and any-pointer media features are marked as at risk.

The following features are at-risk, and may be dropped during the CR period:

• the hover, any-hover, pointer, and any-pointer media features
  https://drafts.csswg.org/mediaqueries-4/#status

But my quick testing and caniuse show that they're actually supported in 3 engines (Blink, EdgeHTML, WebKit).
https://caniuse.com/#feat=css-media-interaction

Mozilla sent an intent to implement last month, so hopefully they'll be well supported pretty soon.
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/mozilla.dev.platform/WhXB19qGVkI

So, I'm not sure why they're still marked as so. Are there other reasons besides implementations?

[danburzo]

__Update:__ Interaction Media Queries are available starting with Firefox 64!

[bathos]

I’ve found these valuable repeatedly in different contexts. Hover MQs in particular can be the key to taking interactions over the line from ‘accessible, but not optimal for all devices’ to ‘friendly and intuitive for (hopefully) everyone’. They’re also supported in every major browser. I’m guessing the warnings are out of date. It would be a relief if they can be removed.

(Meta thing: it’s great to know about ‘at risk’ features, but I’ve seen devs choose not to use appropriate features because of that notice before, interpreting it as an indication that the API isn’t reliable enough. Maybe that’s a rare thing, I dunno, but since non-adoption can be a factor in at-risk-ness, I’ve wondered if they ever become self-fulfilling prophecies...)

[frivoal]

(meta thing: yes, it is a known problem that labeling things at risk, which is meant to be a W3C process thing only, irrelevant to users or implementer or anybody who's not tasked with transitioning specs to various maturity levels, ends up being misinterpreted as some kind of warning sign, and makes people shy away from the feature. That's really unfortunate.)

[frivoal]

Agenda+ to propose dropping the at-risk marker on these features.

[hiikezoe]

As far as I know there is no APIs on Windows to tell which pointer device is the primary one or not. Is there?

[hober]

WebKit implements any-hover and any-pointer; we support removing the at-risk markers.

[css-meeting-bot]

The CSS Working Group just discussed mediaqueries-4] interaction media features (any-pointer, etc) still at risk?, and agreed to the following:

• RESOLVED: remove at-risk on these media features

The full IRC log of that discussion

<dael> Topic: mediaqueries-4] interaction media features (any-pointer, etc) still at risk?

<dael> github: https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/issues/1989

<dael> florian: Limited tests, but they are implemented in multiple browsers. I suspect we should remove at-risk label since people mis-read it as "please don't use" If it's impl at-risk is no longer justified

<dael> astearns: Obj to remove at-risk on these media features

<dael> RESOLVED: remove at-risk on these media features