- From: Aleksandar Totic <notifications@github.com>
- Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2017 16:06:25 -0700
- To: w3ctag/design-reviews <design-reviews@noreply.github.com>
- Cc: Subscribed <subscribed@noreply.github.com>
- Message-ID: <w3ctag/design-reviews/issues/187@github.com>
Hello TAG! I'm requesting a TAG review of: - Name: ResizeObserver - Specification URL: [spec url] - Explainer: [https://github.com/WICG/ResizeObserver/blob/master/explainer.md] - Primary contacts: @atotic Further details (optional): - Relevant time constraints or deadlines: Chrome would like to ship in M62 (Aug 31st, 2017 branch point) - [x] I have read and filled out the [Self-Review Questionnare on Security and Privacy](https://www.w3.org/TR/security-privacy-questionnaire/). The [assessment is here](https://github.com/WICG/ResizeObserver/blob/master/security-privacy.txt). - [x] I have reviewed the TAG's [API Design Principles](https://w3ctag.github.io/design-principles/) Previous discussions/implementations: Many of the interesting design decisions have been discussed on ResizeObserver github [issues](https://github.com/WICG/ResizeObserver/issues). - [Which strategy for preventing infinite loop when delivering resize notifications](https://github.com/WICG/ResizeObserver/issues/7)? - [What is initial state of ResizeObservation content size](https://github.com/WICG/ResizeObserver/issues/8)? Chrome has [implemented](https://crbug.com/612962) ResizeObserver behind a flag. Firefox has [worked](https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1272409) on ResizeObserver implementation. ResizeObserver has been discussed at TPAC meeting in Lisbon 2016. We'd prefer the TAG provide feedback as (please select one): - [ ] open issues in our Github repo for each point of feedback - [ ] open a single issue in our Github repo for the entire review - [x] leave review feedback as a comment in this issue and @-notify [@atotic] -- You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/w3ctag/design-reviews/issues/187
Received on Thursday, 10 August 2017 23:06:47 UTC