W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-script-coord@w3.org > October to December 2013

Re: [matrix][cssom-view] DOMPoint, DOMPointLiteral definitions

From: Simon Pieters <simonp@opera.com>
Date: Tue, 01 Oct 2013 13:43:25 +0200
To: "Robert O'Callahan" <robert@ocallahan.org>
Cc: www-style <www-style@w3.org>, "Boris Zbarsky" <bzbarsky@mit.edu>, "public-script-coord@w3.org" <public-script-coord@w3.org>
Message-ID: <op.w39xinuqidj3kv@simons-macbook-pro.local>
On Mon, 30 Sep 2013 19:56:23 +0200, Robert O'Callahan  
<robert@ocallahan.org> wrote:

> On Tue, Oct 1, 2013 at 4:02 AM, Simon Pieters <simonp@opera.com> wrote:
>
>> Do we need to differentiate between live/read-only and immutable at all?
>>
>
> In theory it could be useful for some clients to know when an object is
> immutable, because it means they can avoid copying it.
>
> Currently we don't need DOMRectImmutable because AFAIK we don't have
> anything that would return an immutable rect. So we can avoid specifying  
> it
> for now, and just specify DOMRect and DOMRectMutable.

That's what the spec has right now, but it calls them DOMRectReadOnly and  
DOMRect (since the mutable one has a constructor, it's nicer for it to  
have a short name).

The two interfaces now have their top/right/bottom/left attributes  
identical. We could move them to a common interface, like DOMRectBase or  
AbstractDOMRect.

-- 
Simon Pieters
Opera Software
Received on Tuesday, 1 October 2013 11:44:06 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:14:18 UTC