W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-web-perf@w3.org > August 2011

Re: [RequestAnimationFrame] Processing model defined

From: Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@MIT.EDU>
Date: Wed, 24 Aug 2011 01:13:22 -0400
Message-ID: <4E548872.2030103@mit.edu>
To: James Robinson <jamesr@google.com>
CC: public-web-perf@w3.org
On 8/17/11 2:22 AM, James Robinson wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 27, 2011 at 11:13 PM, Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@mit.edu
> <mailto:bzbarsky@mit.edu>> wrote:
>     Or put another way, we _do_ want jQuery to build animate() on top of
>     requestAnimationFrame and we do _not_ want to break the huge amount
>     of deployed content that's using animate() and was perfectly fine
>     with the behavior it used to have.  The question is how animate()
>     can implement the behavior it used to have on top of
>     requestAnimationFrame.
>
> That's a good way to put it.  One counterargument is that jQuery (or
> other authors) could implement the behavior you describe with a
> combination of requestAnimationFrame, page visibility, and timers.

Maybe we should start by contacting the jQuery folks then....

(Sorry for the lag; I was on vacation.)

-Boris
Received on Wednesday, 24 August 2011 05:13:51 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:04:31 UTC