Jody Klymak

I'll close this, but feel free to ask for a reopen

This is a relatively large behaviour change. Perhaps for the better, and I'd definitely support this as a default. However, is there a way for users to get the old...

I guess I'm in favour of a reasonable default as proposed here, but also an explicit state on the Axes that can be queried and set. Probably pan needs to...

My personal opinion is we should figure out the api for allowing the user to control the pass through before we change the behaviour in a way the user can't...

So I think the API would be: `axes._captures_navigation` - `None`: default as proposed here, and sentinel that the user hasn't explicitly set this. - `True`: stop further propagation down axes...

> Note... events are not "continued" with respect to data-coordinates, the "continuation" only propagates the mouse-position to the other axes! Thats understood, but replacing an explicit (though perhaps undesirable) behaviour...

> Should `axes.captures_navigation=None` be ingested into `rcParams` so that users can override the global default? I wouldn't unless there is an outcry. To be clear, I support the proposed default...

Yes, if you rebase, the docs should build again. Setuptools broke us.

BTW: this definitely needs an API behaviour change note. `/docs/api/next_api/behavior`

Yes, thats expected, or at least understood. You can use `constrained_layout` instead... Edit: tight_layout and constrained_layout are not compatible.