- From: Nat Duca <nduca@chromium.org>
- Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2012 13:50:20 -0800
- To: Jatinder Mann <jmann@microsoft.com>
- Cc: Tony Gentilcore <tonyg@google.com>, "public-web-perf@w3.org" <public-web-perf@w3.org>, James Robinson <jamesr@google.com>, "dmandelin@mozilla.com" <dmandelin@mozilla.com>
- Message-ID: <CAAMsTOuObigSL_ExsG2xX+vo89q4cNaNLM8QWcjgwaSki_u0SQ@mail.gmail.com>
On a related note, as it stands now, the requestAnimationFrame callback takes a DOM timestamp: callback FrameRequestCallback = void (DOMTimeStamp <http://www.w3.org/TR/WebIDL/#common-DOMTimeStamp> time); In an ideal world, it be cool if the "time" parameter was instead a high resolution time --- without it, 60hz animations would look like either 58 or 62hz. E.g.: requesAnimationFrame(function(frame0_time) { requestAnimationFrame(function(frame1_time) { displayRefreshRate = 1000 / frame1_time - frame0_time; }; }); On Thu, Feb 23, 2012 at 8:31 AM, Jatinder Mann <jmann@microsoft.com> wrote: > We spoke about specifying it in the High Resolution Time spec. I will have > a draft of that spec available for next week's conference call. It aligns > very closely with what James has described in his proposal: > http://lists.whatwg.org/htdig.cgi/whatwg-whatwg.org/2011-July/032343.html. > > Jatinder > > -----Original Message----- > From: Tony Gentilcore [mailto:tonyg@google.com] > Sent: Thursday, February 23, 2012 5:33 AM > To: public-web-perf@w3.org > Cc: James Robinson; dmandelin@mozilla.com > Subject: Specifying window.performance.now() > > Last July, James Robinson proposed[1] window.performance.now() to the > whatwg. We've talked about it several times in this group, but as far as > I'm aware no one has created a draft spec yet. > > WebKit is ready to move forward with an implementation[2] and David > Mandelin informs me Mozilla is ready as well[3]. Just so those initial > prefixed versions line up as much as possible, I think it makes sense to > have a draft spec somewhere before we start landing. So my questions are: > 1. Does it make sense to add it to this group's charter[4]? > 2. If so, who would like to edit it? James? > > -Tony > > [1] > http://lists.whatwg.org/htdig.cgi/whatwg-whatwg.org/2011-July/032343.html > [2] https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=66684 > [3] https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=539095#c29 > [4] http://www.w3.org/2011/04/webperf > > > > >
Received on Friday, 24 February 2012 13:31:00 UTC