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

Re: Mutation events replacement

From: Dave Raggett <dsr@w3.org>
Date: Fri, 22 Jul 2011 10:08:09 +0100
Message-ID: <4E293DF9.4080708@w3.org>
To: Adam Klein <adamk@chromium.org>
CC: Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc>, Olli Pettay <Olli.Pettay@helsinki.fi>, Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@mit.edu>, public-webapps@w3.org
On 22/07/11 02:26, Adam Klein wrote:
> This is only complex because you're coalescing the mutations, right?
> In Rafael's original proposal, each mutation would result in a single
> immutable mutation record, so the semantics would be to "deliver" (by
> appending to a queue associated with each observer) a mutation record
> to any currently-registered observers.
>
> Or is there some other concern with beginning notifications partway
> through a task?

I would suggest avoiding coalescing mutations altogether!

But if you are going to, *don't* coalesce mutations when the resulting 
DOM tree is dependent on the order in which those mutations took place.  
This is critical to distributed editing applications.

-- 
  Dave Raggett<dsr@w3.org>  http://www.w3.org/People/Raggett
Received on Friday, 22 July 2011 09:08:42 GMT

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