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

Re: [requestAnimationFrame] Spec to LC?

From: James Robinson <jamesr@google.com>
Date: Wed, 8 Feb 2012 18:43:33 -0800
Message-ID: <CAD73mdJykMo0UVozB+5X-kYJbR1qTqhJ6H2E1vT8VFrpj6Nb0A@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Karen Anderson (IE)" <Karen.Anderson@microsoft.com>
Cc: Jatinder Mann <jmann@microsoft.com>, "cam@mcc.id.au" <cam@mcc.id.au>, "public-web-perf@w3.org" <public-web-perf@w3.org>
On Wed, Feb 8, 2012 at 4:42 PM, Karen Anderson (IE) <
Karen.Anderson@microsoft.com> wrote:

>  I remember now that we want to encourage the use of performance.now()
> which will be part of the high resolution time specification.  Iíll make
> sure that references to the animationStartTime property are removed and
> updated.
>

Exactly - I think we want to spec something in that sort of namespace, but
since it's not here yet we should probably hold off on adding references it
to test suites.

- James


> ****
>
> ** **
>
> Thanks,****
>
> Karen****
>
> ** **
>
> *From:* Karen Anderson (IE) [mailto:Karen.Anderson@microsoft.com]
> *Sent:* Wednesday, February 08, 2012 4:36 PM
> *To:* James Robinson; Jatinder Mann
> *Cc:* cam@mcc.id.au; public-web-perf@w3.org
> *Subject:* RE: [requestAnimationFrame] Spec to LC?****
>
> ** **
>
> Hello,****
>
> ** **
>
> Yes, porting the test suite on the IE Test Center to our working group
> will be a great start.  I should be able to have it ready for review in the
> next few weeks.  Regarding the animationStartTime property, it was once in
> the spec and there still are mentions of it in section 4.2 as an Editorial
> note to add it back.  There havenít been any discussions on this in a
> while.  What is the thinking on it now?  Seems to me that if we want to
> have a high precision time as input to our callback that we should have a
> method for getting a similarly high precision time independently as well.*
> ***
>
> ** **
>
> Thoughts?****
>
> -Karen****
>
> ** **
>
> *From:* James Robinson [mailto:jamesr@google.com]
> *Sent:* Wednesday, February 08, 2012 3:53 PM
> *To:* Jatinder Mann
> *Cc:* cam@mcc.id.au; public-web-perf@w3.org
> *Subject:* Re: [requestAnimationFrame] Spec to LC?****
>
> ** **
>
> On Wed, Jan 25, 2012 at 10:56 AM, Jatinder Mann <jmann@microsoft.com>
> wrote:****
>
> James, Cameron,****
>
>  ****
>
> Do you feel that the requestAnimationFrame spec is ready to move to Last
> Call? In todayís working group conf call, we were discussing the status of
> all specifications and noticed that there are no remaining open issues on
> this particular spec. ****
>
>  ****
>
> The IE Test Center has a few requestAnimationFrame tests from a few months
> ago -
> http://samples.msdn.microsoft.com/ietestcenter/#perfPaintNotification. I
> am looking to update the tests to match the current spec status and submit
> them for the requestAnimationFrame test suite in the near future.****
>
> ** **
>
> Hello,****
>
> ** **
>
> I've resolved the remaining open issues and think going to Last Call is a
> great idea.  I'm also excited about having a test suite.
> http://samples.msdn.microsoft.com/ietestcenter/#perfPaintNotification looks
> like a good start, but it seems a bit out of date (for example it tests for
> a animationStartTime property that has never existed in a W3C spec).****
>
> ** **
>
> - James****
>
> ** **
>
>   ****
>
> Thanks,****
>
> Jatinder****
>
>  ** **
>
Received on Thursday, 9 February 2012 02:44:05 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 9 February 2012 02:44:06 GMT