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

Re: Mutation events replacement

From: Ryosuke Niwa <rniwa@webkit.org>
Date: Tue, 5 Jul 2011 17:36:55 -0700
Message-ID: <CABNRm60Jhk+rU0AO3XfxD5WpM_BQ_+1ATnLw05-h0LHrsZ_u2g@mail.gmail.com>
To: Rafael Weinstein <rafaelw@google.com>
Cc: Olli@pettay.fi, Aryeh Gregor <Simetrical+w3c@gmail.com>, Adam Klein <adamk@google.com>, Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc>, Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>, Webapps WG <public-webapps@w3.org>
On Tue, Jul 5, 2011 at 5:27 PM, Rafael Weinstein <rafaelw@google.com> wrote:
>
> It seems like these are rarified enough cases that visual artifacts
> are acceptable collateral damage if you do this. [Put another way, if
> you care enough about the visual polish of your app that you will put
> energy into avoiding flickr, you probably aren't using alert and
> showModalDialog anyway].
>
> Also, it's up to the app when to do it, so it's entirely in its
> control (and thus avoid visual artifacts).
>

Given that we don't provide an API to control paint in general, I'm not
convinced that we should add such a requirement in the DOM mutation event
spec.

Note that this is a problem with both proposals. Work done in (at
> least some) mutation observers is delayed. If a sync paint occurs
> before it, it's work won't be reflected on the screen.
>

Right.  Maybe we can add a note saying that the user agents are recommended
not to paint before all mutation observers are called.  I don't think we
should make this a requirement.

- Ryosuke
Received on Wednesday, 6 July 2011 00:37:50 GMT

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