- From: Simon Pieters <simonp@opera.com>
- Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2015 11:35:53 +0100
- To: "Jinho Bang" <jinho.bang@samsung.com>, "Philip Rogers" <pdr@chromium.org>
- Cc: public-fx@w3.org, "Ian Kilpatrick" <ikilpatrick@google.com>, "Robert O'Callahan" <rocallahan@mozilla.com>
Moving to public-fx (blink-dev in bcc). On Mon, 16 Nov 2015 19:03:55 +0100, Philip Rogers <pdr@chromium.org> wrote: > I thought the same thing when watching that talk :) V8 extras seems like > a > great solution for making these objects performant and easily > implementable. > > I think this spec still needs a little work to not have 'live' objects > though. The Houdini folks are working on layout APIs that just return > simple POD objects and I think that would be more appropriate for these > objects as well. I thought this had been discussed in the past, but I can't find anything now. Only https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-fx/2014JanMar/0012.html which isn't asking for non-liveness. The only live object is DOMQuad#bounds, I believe. https://drafts.fxtf.org/geometry/#associated-bounding-rectangle What are the pros and cons for live vs non-live for this object? > On Mon, Nov 16, 2015 at 1:40 AM, Jinho Bang <jinho.bang@samsung.com> > wrote: > >> V8 Extras: >> >> https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1Jgk6ymWooNYStTP11F_z9ajk3ezLgQqrGkdQTxE4xT0/mobilepresent?slide=id.gc6fa3c898_0_0 >> >> > -- Simon Pieters Opera Software
Received on Tuesday, 17 November 2015 10:36:32 UTC