W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > September 2006

Re: [css3-selectors] :parent selector

From: Del Merritt <del@alum.mit.edu>
Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2006 08:57:02 -0400
Message-ID: <4519239E.4080907@alum.mit.edu>
To: David Woolley <david@djwhome.demon.co.uk>
Cc: www-style@w3.org

David Woolley wrote:
>> Please explain to us why is incremental rendering extremely important? Is  
>>     
>
> It's in the nature of the medium, even if many "web designers" use 
> techniques that frustrate it, often without need.
> 	:
> Note that PDF had to add incremental loading captilitise ("optimised PDF")
> to try and make it more usable on the internet, although that is just
> for documents.

For the handful of us who are also interested in printing, incremental 
rendering is a grail.  While [X]HTML is not a PDL, it, coupled with CSS, 
is increasingly being used as such.  When the document gets large, it's 
all the more important for "@media print {}" to have a chance at doing 
the rendering right within a tight memory budget.

A current (non-optimal) solution to the parent-child problem is to keep 
the node structure around and chuck the text-only leaf data once it has 
been rendered.  If the node structure is heavy, though, it still 
presents a memory burden.  Sibling selectors present a similar problem, 
compounded by the fact that you can't get rid of the siblings (or some 
reduced cache of their presence) until you've handled the last one.  
Think: "<body><p>blah</p><p>blah</p><p>blah</p>...<p>blah</p></body>"
Received on Tuesday, 26 September 2006 12:57:08 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 27 April 2009 13:54:47 GMT