With that in mind, what would you have to see to be convinced that native scrolling is not as important as many people claim it is? Also, what do you think it would take to convince many of those that hold native scroll in high regard that maybe it's not as deserving of the pedestal upon which it stands?
Dead serious here, besides meeting the definition of "fitness for use" by the common app user, it's as important to meet the definition of "fitness for use" by those that will be tasked with implementing an app that is built upon our framework and by extension uses our scrollview.
> With that in mind, what would you have to see to be convinced that native scrolling is not as important as many people claim it is?
Something that actually is provides basic scrolling function effectively that replaces native scrolling -- as opposed to something that stutters badly on current, top-of-the-line mobile platforms, performs poorly (and, with many expected interaction methods, doesn't work at all) on desktop, etc.
If you are going to convince people to buy into your reinvention of the wheel, it better at least roll properly.
Native scrolling isn't actually important -- what is important is access to content that meets expectations either because it works as expected from past experiences or because there are clear affordances that make the transition easy. Native scrolling is an easy way to achieve that because users of a platform are almost certainly familiar with the platforms scrolling behavior, and every major platform has native scrolling that works acceptably in virtually all reasonable circumstances.
If I have scrolling content with no scrollbar, that's bad.
If I have a scrollbar I can't interact with as expected and nothing that clues me into how I should interact with it, that's bad.
If, on desktop, I can't scroll with the keyboard, that's bad.
If scrolling is erratic and jumpy on any platform, that's bad.
If content obviously extends past the viewport and there is no obvious way to scroll the viewport at all (as happens horizontally on mobile with the Famo.us website), that's bad.
I'd suggest a scroller that works on most (for some reasonable definition of most) of the major (for some reasonable definition of major) platforms for the types of sites you're hoping will use it. A minimum list of platforms would be Firefox and Chrome on desktop and the latest stock mobile browsers on iOS and Android. A minimum website would be your own marketing and documentation portal.
It's all well and good to say "don't put native scrolling on a pedestal" but if the alternative simply isn't usable that pedestal sure seems justified.
With that in mind, what would you have to see to be convinced that native scrolling is not as important as many people claim it is? Also, what do you think it would take to convince many of those that hold native scroll in high regard that maybe it's not as deserving of the pedestal upon which it stands?
Dead serious here, besides meeting the definition of "fitness for use" by the common app user, it's as important to meet the definition of "fitness for use" by those that will be tasked with implementing an app that is built upon our framework and by extension uses our scrollview.