W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webapps@w3.org > October to December 2011

Re: Mutation Observers: a replacement for DOM Mutation Events

From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2011 09:26:42 -0700
Message-ID: <CAAWBYDDR1dhLs+OO9tB1yq6dcf5=4HxKCk8-B=OAo8ASp6v46Q@mail.gmail.com>
To: Sean Hogan <shogun70@westnet.com.au>
Cc: Adam Klein <adamk@chromium.org>, public-webapps@w3.org, Olli@pettay.fi, Ojan Vafai <ojan@chromium.org>, rafaelw@chromium.org, rniwa@chromium.org, Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc>, annevk@opera.com, arv@chromium.org
On Mon, Oct 10, 2011 at 7:51 PM, Sean Hogan <shogun70@westnet.com.au> wrote:
> On 24/09/11 7:16 AM, Adam Klein wrote:
>> - Is free of the faults of the existing Mutation Events mechanism
>> (enumerated in detail here:
>> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps/2011JulSep/0779.html)
>
> A simpler solution that is free from the faults listed in that email would
> be to have (at max) one mutation observer for the whole page context. I
> guess this would be called at the end of the task or immediately before page
> reflows.
>
> If a js lib (or multiple libs) want to provide finer grained mutation
> handling then let them work out the details.

That seems unworkably restrictive.  It's very easy to imagine multiple
libraries listening for different kinds of things at the same time.
Libraries would just end up re-implementing event distribution, which
is something we can avoid by doing it correctly now.

~TJ
Received on Tuesday, 11 October 2011 16:27:30 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 18:49:48 GMT