W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-web-perf@w3.org > April 2012

RE: [PageVisibility] Feedback on the spec

From: Jatinder Mann <jmann@microsoft.com>
Date: Tue, 17 Apr 2012 00:23:55 +0000
To: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>, James Graham <jgraham@opera.com>, Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@mit.edu>
CC: "public-web-perf@w3.org" <public-web-perf@w3.org>
Message-ID: <AE5FFD9402CD4F4785E812F2C9929D652EEFD3@BL2PRD0310MB374.namprd03.prod.outlook.com>
On 4/16/12 11:14 AM, Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@mit.edu> wrote:
> I agree that this is not as clear as it should be.  It should probably 
> just says that the event is fired at a Document when the UA determines 
> that the .visibilityState of that Document has changed.

You are correct that the spec isn't very clear here. I will update the spec to tie firing the visibilitychange event with a change in the visibilityState attribute.


On 4/16/12 12:52 PM, Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com> wrote:
>On 4/16/12 12:16 PM, Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@mit.edu> wrote:
>> On 4/16/12 3:14 PM, James Graham wrote:
>> No, you're not wrong (modulo the discussion about what should happen 
>> during page unloading).
>>
>>> Assuming I am not wrong about that, I think the right fix to the 
>>> problem above is to specify that when the visibility of a top level 
>>> browsing context changes, an event is fired on that browsing 
>>> context's document object and on the document object of each descendant browsing context.
>>
>> That might be fine, yes.
>
> If that happens a) those events need to be queued (using HTML's event
> loop) and b) order needs to be defined as it would be observable.

I agree here as well. I will update the spec and define the ordering to be preorder traversal.

Thanks,
Jatinder
Received on Tuesday, 17 April 2012 00:24:32 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 17 April 2012 00:24:33 GMT