Re: [Page Visibility 2] Request for Comments

On 10/31/14, 3:30 PM, Deng, Pan wrote:
> Test here http://www.w3.org/2014/10/pv2/iframe-hidden.html, right, it is a display:none iframe.

OK.  I'm happy to at least consider changes here for display:none 
iframes.  Especially MUST-level changes!

I'm a lot less sanguine about things like iframes that are scrolled 
outside the viewport, browser windows covered by other apps, etc.

> Another category is that non-animation related, e.g. the vibration, we are not sure if they are widely used it within a display:none(or other hidden) iframe, not sure if they all expect to be tied to top browsing context.

Correct.

> So, I think it is worthy to try the change first to see if we can go through.

If you can find a UA willing to take the potential compat there, sure. 
I am not happy with Mozilla taking that gompat hit.

> Or, if there is strong use case that we need to tie iframe .hidden to top browsing context.

There isn't, and I argued against such tying when PV1 was being created. 
  And got ignored.

At this point, this is purely about compat issues.

-Boris

Received on Friday, 31 October 2014 19:34:22 UTC