W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webapps@w3.org > January to March 2014

Re: Extending Mutation Observers to address use cases of

From: Ryosuke Niwa <rniwa@apple.com>
Date: Tue, 11 Feb 2014 18:27:25 -0800
Cc: "olli@pettay.fi" <olli@pettay.fi>, "public-webapps@w3.org WG" <public-webapps@w3.org>, Erik Arvidsson <arv@google.com>, Anne van Kesteren <annevk@annevk.nl>, Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc>
Message-id: <75EDCF91-C76D-4A3E-9647-022EBB957AA5@apple.com>
To: Bjoern Hoehrmann <derhoermi@gmx.net>

> On Feb 11, 2014, at 6:06 PM, Bjoern Hoehrmann <derhoermi@gmx.net> wrote:
> 
> * Olli Pettay wrote:
>> We could add some scheduling thing to mutation observers. By default 
>> we'd use microtask, since that tends to be good for various performance 
>> reasons, but normal tasks or nanotasks could be possible too.

Right, we need some sort of a switch.  I'm not certain if we want to add it as a per-observation option or a global switch when we create an observer. My guy feeling is that we want the latter.  It would be weird for some mutation records to be delivered earlier than others to the same observer.

I'd like to know exact semantics requirements before start jumping into details though.

> This sounds like adding a switch that would dynamically invalidate
> assumptions mutation observers might make, which sounds like a bad idea. Could you elaborate?

I don't really follow what the problem is. Could you elaborate on what you see as a problem?

- R. Niwa
Received on Wednesday, 12 February 2014 02:27:53 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 18:14:21 UTC