- From: Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@MIT.EDU>
- Date: Wed, 29 Feb 2012 16:40:14 -0500
- To: James Robinson <jamesr@google.com>
- CC: public-web-perf@w3.org
On 2/29/12 4:20 PM, James Robinson wrote: > I'm a little more optimistic about requestAnimationFrame. It's true > that lots of code is using JS Date.now(), but that code will continue to > work as-is. I do not think that there is a large amount of web content > out there using the callback _parameter_ for timing, most code is just > ignoring it and grabbing the time out-of-band. If true, that would make things work ok. I guess I'd thought people would actually use the parameter, since it's there for a reason... Certainly the demos I've seen using requestAnimationFrame use it. I seem to recall Google Maps doing so too, but maybe they changed that? > I think we should try changing this and see what happens. If it turns > out that we can't change the value of the first parameter to the > callback, then we can do something uglier like provide a second callback > parameter. :( > I think that we definitely do want to provide a timestamp to > authors as a callback parameter so that they can synchronize multiple > animations running on the same logical frame. Oh, we absolutely do. That's what Gecko does right now. The only question is what the timestamp's 0-point should be.... -Boris
Received on Wednesday, 29 February 2012 21:40:43 UTC