W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webapps@w3.org > July to September 2011

Re: Mutation events replacement

From: Rafael Weinstein <rafaelw@google.com>
Date: Tue, 5 Jul 2011 14:29:48 -0700
Message-ID: <CABMdHiSSiuGS7=vzEOKhop9qqTW3aa-6aRjDJHMudpOjfSOD6A@mail.gmail.com>
To: Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@mit.edu>
Cc: Ojan Vafai <ojan@chromium.org>, public-webapps@w3.org
On Tue, Jul 5, 2011 at 2:27 PM, Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@mit.edu> wrote:
> On 7/5/11 5:21 PM, Rafael Weinstein wrote:
>>
>> For ChildlistChanged, the potential data to be included:
>> -Target node*
>> -Removed nodes*
>> -Added nodes
>> -one of nextSibling or previousSibling*
>>
>> My belief is that including the starred (*) data above would be
>> sufficient to meet David's test of mirroring a tree *without* a ton of
>> processing or O(N) memory.
>
> How is that not O(N) memory?

Sorry - that was imprecise. What I meant was: the application script
wouldn't need to maintain more or less it's own copy of the DOM to
know for certain whether a node has effectively been added, removed,
or moved elsewhere in the document.

>
> -Boris
>
Received on Tuesday, 5 July 2011 21:30:21 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 18:49:46 GMT