Re: [css-houdini-drafts] [css-paint-api] Unnecessary paint-valid flag?

The Working Group just discussed `Make paint invalidation non-normative or something?`.

<details><summary>The full IRC log of that discussion</summary>
&lt;dael> Topic: Make paint invalidation non-normative or something?<br>
&lt;dael> github: https://github.com/w3c/css-houdini-drafts/issues/447<br>
&lt;dael> iank_: Pointed out by Alan Jeffrey that...basically we have a section of the paint spec that says how invalidation works.<br>
&lt;dael> iank_: If you have a paint validation and the style changes you have to make changes and you invalidate. It was pointed out you don't need that because you have the caching function. The caching is all the input are the same. So we could drop the whole paint invalidation section and rely on the caching and that engines can be cleverer.<br>
&lt;dael> iank_: Thoughts?<br>
&lt;dael> iank_: We could make this non-normative and say you can do validation this was or rely on caching step.<br>
&lt;dael> dbaron: I have a valgue memory when I looke d awhile ago I thought this section was more complex then it needed to be.<br>
&lt;dael> iank_: Maybe. I think I changed it since then where we moved the invalidation to individual pain functions. [reads]<br>
&lt;dael> iank_: WE could drop this and let the engines do smarter. Or make the whole section non-normative saying that engines can add incalidation.<br>
&lt;dael> shane: It would be much faster [missed]<br>
&lt;dael> Rossen: Leaning toward making it non-normative?<br>
&lt;dael> iank_: I'm fine with that. I think it should still be in the spec because I think engines will do that.<br>
&lt;dael> krit: Is there something we should add to ensure that everything is correct?<br>
&lt;dael> iank_: We did that.<br>
&lt;dael> smfr: The invalidation isn't exposed.<br>
&lt;dael> iank_: Yeah.<br>
&lt;dael> iank_: as a webkit engine impl your thoughts?<br>
&lt;dael> smfr: I don't think there's value to this section. Is there other text that spec when something becomes invalid?<br>
&lt;dael> iank_: No<br>
&lt;dael> smfr: You need that. You need to desc imputs that trigger<br>
&lt;dael> iank_: We've got that in the cache step. The paint size and similar.<br>
&lt;dael> Rossen: Objections to dropping section 2: paint invalidation ?<br>
&lt;dael> rESOLVED: drop section 2: paint invalidation<br>
</details>


-- 
GitHub Notification of comment by css-meeting-bot
Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/css-houdini-drafts/issues/447#issuecomment-379735569 using your GitHub account

Received on Monday, 9 April 2018 12:33:06 UTC