- From: Cameron McCormack <cam@mcc.id.au>
- Date: Tue, 3 May 2011 15:51:24 +1200
- To: James Robinson <jamesr@google.com>
- Cc: Jatinder Mann <jmann@microsoft.com>, public-web-perf@w3.org
Jatinder Mann:
> > 4. More information is needed on the sample() method of the
> > FrameRequestCallback interface. A non-normative example use case
> > would be appropriate.
James Robinson:
> I'm not sure quite what you mean - FrameRequestCallback should be
> invisible to the users of the API and exists mostly as a way to talk
> about the enqueued callbacks within the specification. Users will just
> pass in a function to requestAnimationFrame. Is there a better way to
> spec this, Cameron?
I have an open bug on Web IDL to consider adding function types:
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=12385
but in the meantime, how it is specified at the moment is fine.
[Callback] actually means that you could write either
requestAnimationFrame(function(time) { ... });
or
requestAnimationFrame({ sample: function(time) { ... } });
[Callback=FunctionOnly] disallows the latter form, if that’s what we’d
prefer.
--
Cameron McCormack ≝ http://mcc.id.au/
Received on Tuesday, 3 May 2011 03:52:09 UTC