Duplicate pre-req for Element Click

[gsnedders]

In chapter 14. Element Interaction, section 14.1 Element Click:

The Element Click command scrolls into view the element if it is not already pointer-interactable

Assuming my understanding per #1104 is correct, then this is redundant. scroll into view is a no-op if the element is not already in view, and elements in view are a superset of those which are pointer-interactable. Therefore, if we to repeat that behaviour we should use in view or (probably better) we should drop the redundant statement entirely.

[gsnedders]

Oh, this is just informative, given it duplicates what's below it. That's totally not obvious. Still, if we're informatively stating this we should probably actually have it be correct.

[andreastt]

The pointer-interactable condition is actually (almost) the definition of in view.

Every command has a brief description to introduce it which is meant to be informative. I entirely agree with you this isn’t always clear: I think it sometimes borders on API documentation. Should we remove them entirely? This applies to virtually all the introductions to the commands.

[gsnedders]

I'd suggest something like the green "Note" sections used elsewhere (HTML, CSS) and rephrasing it to not sound like spec-prose, so something a bit more like:

Note: The Element Click command clicks on the given element, scrolling the viewport if needed.

Leave the rest of the detail, and the error conditions, out of the informative description, IMO.

[andreastt]

That is a good and actionable suggestion, thanks! I’ve started work on making command introductions non-normative:

#1107
#1108
#1110
#1111
#1112
#1113
#1114
#1115
#1116